[PATCH 4.9.y 1/3] drm/bridge: adv7511: Rework adv7511_power_on/off() so they can be reused internally

[Greg KH]

On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 10:10:26AM +0700, Nhan Nguyen wrote:
> From: John Stultz <john.stultz at linaro.org>
> 
> commit 651e4769ba2a9f20c4b8a823ae2727bf7fa9c9f0 upstream.
> 
> In chasing down issues with EDID probing, I found some
> duplicated but incomplete logic used to power the chip on and
> off.
> 
> This patch refactors the adv7511_power_on/off functions, so
> they can be used for internal needs.
> 
> Cc: David Airlie <airlied at linux.ie>
> Cc: Archit Taneja <architt at codeaurora.org>
> Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas at sang-engineering.com>
> Cc: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars at metafoo.de>
> Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart at ideasonboard.com>
> Cc: dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: John Stultz <john.stultz at linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Archit Taneja <architt at codeaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Thong Ho <thong.ho.px at rvc.renesas.com>
> Signed-off-by: Nhan Nguyen <nhan.nguyen.yb at renesas.com>
> Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1484614372-15342-5-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/adv7511/adv7511_drv.c | 15 +++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Why are you asking for these 3 patches to be backported to the 4.9
stable tree?  What bugs are they fixing?  How do they meet the stable
kernel rules?

totally confused,

greg k-h