On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 06:40:08PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> Having a device with a status property != "okay" in the DT is a valid
> use case, and we should not prevent the registration of the DRM device
> when the DSI device connected to the DSI controller is disabled.
> 
> Consider the ENODEV return code as a valid result and do not expose the
> DSI encoder/connector when it happens.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezil...@bootlin.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/vc4_dsi.c | 15 +++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/vc4_dsi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/vc4_dsi.c
> index 8aa897835118..db2f137f8b7b 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/vc4_dsi.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/vc4_dsi.c
> @@ -1606,8 +1606,18 @@ static int vc4_dsi_bind(struct device *dev, struct 
> device *master, void *data)
>  
>       ret = drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge(dev->of_node, 0, 0,
>                                         &panel, &dsi->bridge);
> -     if (ret)
> +     if (ret) {
> +             /* If the bridge or panel pointed by dev->of_node is not
> +              * enabled, just return 0 here so that we don't prevent the DRM
> +              * dev from being registered. Of course that means the DSI
> +              * encoder won't be exposed, but that's not a problem since
> +              * nothing is connected to it.
> +              */

Also, nit: this isn't the correct style for block comments.

Thierry

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Reply via email to