[PATCH v3 00/22] Associate ddc adapters with connectors

[Emil Velikov]

On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 at 17:45, Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 06:01:14PM +0200, Andrzej Pietrasiewicz wrote:
> > It is difficult for a user to know which of the i2c adapters is for which
> > drm connector. This series addresses this problem.
> >
> > The idea is to have a symbolic link in connector's sysfs directory, e.g.:
> >
> > ls -l /sys/class/drm/card0-HDMI-A-1/ddc
> > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Jun 24 10:42 /sys/class/drm/card0-HDMI-A-1/ddc \
> >       -> ../../../../soc/13880000.i2c/i2c-2
> >
> > The user then knows that their card0-HDMI-A-1 uses i2c-2 and can e.g. run
> > ddcutil:
> >
> > ddcutil -b 2 getvcp 0x10
> > VCP code 0x10 (Brightness                    ): current value =    90, max value =   100
> >
> > The first patch in the series adds struct i2c_adapter pointer to struct
> > drm_connector. If the field is used by a particular driver, then an
> > appropriate symbolic link is created by the generic code, which is also added
> > by this patch.
> >
> > The second patch is an example of how to convert a driver to this new scheme.
> >
> > v1..v2:
> >
> > - used fixed name "ddc" for the symbolic link in order to make it easy for
> > userspace to find the i2c adapter
> >
> > v2..v3:
> >
> > - converted as many drivers as possible.
> >
> > PATCHES 3/22-22/22 SHOULD BE CONSIDERED RFC!
>
> There's a lot more drivers than this I think (i915 is absent as an
> example, but there should be tons more). Why are those not possible?

While I fully agree there are more drivers, at the same time I wonder.
Is it a good idea to expect all of those to be fixed in one go and
block patches addressing 15+ drivers?

Personally I think it's reasonable to have this, alongside a TODO
entry for other drivers.

HTH
Emil