[PATCH] drm/i2c: tda998x: don't register the connector

[Brian Starkey]

Hi,

On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 05:08:21PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 01:54:06PM +0100, Brian Starkey wrote:
>> Hi Russell,
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 01:25:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 11:55:48AM +0100, Brian Starkey wrote:
>> > > The connector shouldn't be registered until the rest of the whole device
>> > > is set up, so that consistent state is presented to userspace.
>> > >
>> > > As drm_dev_register() now registers all of the connectors anyway,
>> > > there's no need to explicitly do it in individual drivers so remove
>> > > the calls to drm_connector_register()/drm_connector_unregister().
>> > >
>> > > This allows componentised drivers to use tda998x without having racy
>> > > initialisation.
>> >
>> > Is there a corresponding patch for armada-drm so that the cubox doesn't
>> > regress?  Has it already been merged?
>> >
>>
>> A patch for armada-drm to do what?
>>
>> I should perhaps have explicitly mentioned that this change depends
>> on e28cd4d0a223: "drm: Automatically register/unregister all
>> connectors", which is in drm-next.
>>
>> Like my commit message says - after the above commit, all connectors
>> are automatically registered in drm_dev_register() - so I don't
>> anticipate any regression, but I don't have a cubox to test.
>>
>> armada-drm seems to be doing effectively the same thing as arm/hdlcd,
>> which works fine after this patch with no other changes.
>>
>> Let me know if I've missed something; or if you are able to test on
>> cubox that would be great.
>
>Ack from my side on generally nuking drm_connector_register() from
>everywhere except truely hotplugged connectors like dp mst. It should keep
>working for everyone. Only exception is if there's a driver which calls
>drm_dev_register too early (before all connectors are probed), which would
>be a bug anyway.

Right; the motivation for this change is to fix the init order in
HDLCD and Mali-DP (move drm_dev_register to the end), which we can't
do right now because tda998x expects the DRM device sysfs to be set
up in bind.

@Daniel: Can I take this as your Acked-by?

Should this go in via Russell's tree?

@Russell, are you happy with this change?

Thanks,
Brian

>-Daniel
>-- 
>Daniel Vetter
>Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
>http://blog.ffwll.ch
>