[PATCH v7 0/8] drm/tidss: Use new connector model for tidss

[Tomi Valkeinen]

On 06/06/2023 12:48, neil.armstrong at linaro.org wrote:
> On 06/06/2023 11:46, Aradhya Bhatia wrote:
>> Hi Neil,
>>
>> Thank you for reviewing the previous patches!
>>
>> On 06-Jun-23 14:37, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 06/06/2023 10:21, Aradhya Bhatia wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I have picked up this long standing series from Nikhil Devshatwar[1].
>>>>
>>>> This series moves the tidss to using new connectoe model, where the SoC
>>>> driver (tidss) creates the connector and all the bridges are attached
>>>> with the flag DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR. It also now creates 
>>>> bridge
>>>> to support format negotiation and and 'simple' encoder to expose it to
>>>> the userspace.
>>>>
>>>> Since the bridges do not create the connector, the bus_format and
>>>> bus_flag is set via atomic hooks.
>>>>
>>>> Support format negotiations in the tfp410, sii902x and mhdp-8546 bridge
>>>> drivers as a first step before moving the connector model.
>>>>
>>>> These patches were tested on AM625-SK EVM, AM625 SoC based BeaglePlay,
>>>> and J721E-SK. Display support for AM625 SoC has not been added upstream
>>>> and is a WIP. To test this series on AM625 based platforms, basic
>>>> display support patches, (for driver + devicetree), can be found in
>>>> the "next_AttachNoConn-v2" branch on my github fork[2].
>>>
>>> I can apply all bridge patches right now so only the tidss change 
>>> remain,
>>> is that ok for you ?
>>>
>>
>> While the bridge patches and the tidss patch can be separately built
>> without any issue, the tidss functionality will break if only the bridge
>> patches get picked up, and not the tidss.
>>
>> Would it be possible for you to pick all the patches together once Tomi
>> acks the tidss patch?
> 
> Sure

I think this looks fine. For the series:

Reviewed-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen at ideasonboard.com>

  Tomi