On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 8:35 AM Maxime Ripard <mrip...@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 11:11:33AM +0200, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 04:52:53PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 02:14:43PM +0200, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 10:55:49AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 08:26:02AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 12:44 PM Anusha Srivatsa < > asriv...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A lot of mipi API are deprecated and have a _multi() variant > > > > > > > which is the preferred way forward. This covers TODO in the > > > > > > > gpu Documentation:[1] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > An incomplete effort was made in the previous version > > > > > > > to address this[2]. It removed on the mipi_dsi_dcs_write_seq() > > > > > > > and mipi_dsi_generic_write_seq_multi() with the respective > > > > > > > replacemts and not the rest of the API. > > > > > > > > > > > > You didn't seem to take most of the suggestions I gave in > response to > > > > > > your v1 [3]. Specifically: > > > > > > > > > > > > a) I asked that you CC Tejas. I've added him again. > > > > > > > > > > > > b) I asked that you CC me on the whole patch series, which you > didn't > > > > > > do. I can find them, but I'd find it convenient in this case for > them > > > > > > to be in my Inbox. > > > > > > > > > > > > The first patch conflicts with what Tejas already landed in > > > > > > drm-misc-next. See commit 8025f23728e9 ("drm/panel: > > > > > > xinpeng-xpp055c272: transition to mipi_dsi wrapped functions"). > The > > > > > > second patch _also_ conflicts with what Tejas already landed. See > > > > > > commit f4dd4cb79f9e ("drm/panel: visionox-r66451: transition to > > > > > > mipi_dsi wrapped functions"). Later patches also also conflict. > See > > > > > > commit 0d6c9edf9e5b ("drm/panel: ebbg-ft8719: transition to > mipi_dsi > > > > > > wrapped functions"), commit ce8c69ec90ca ("drm/panel: > > > > > > samsung-s6e88a0-ams452ef01: transition to mipi_dsi wrapped > > > > > > functions"), and commit 7e3bf00047cd ("drm/panel: > sharp-ls060t1sx01: > > > > > > transition to mipi_dsi wrapped functions"). Maybe you should > sync up > > > > > > with drm-misc-next before submitting. > > > > > > > > > > Yes, you should definitely work from drm-misc-next there, and sync > with > > > > > Tejas. > > > > > > > > > > > I also questioned whether this really made sense to try to do > with a > > > > > > Coccinelle script and I still don't think so. It looks like > Dmitry has > > > > > > already reviewed the first few of your patches and has repeated > my > > > > > > advice. If you want to help with the effort of addressing this > TODO > > > > > > item then that's great, but I'll stop reviewing (and start > silently > > > > > > deleting) any future submissions of yours that say that they're > done > > > > > > entirely with a Coccinelle script unless you address this point > and > > > > > > convince me that your Coccinelle script is really smart enough to > > > > > > handle all the corner cases. I'll also assert that you should > review > > > > > > Tejas's submissions to see how these conversions are expected to > go. > > > > > > > > > > I couldn't find that in your first answer though. What corner > cases do > > > > > you have in mind, and why do you think coccinelle can't handle > them? > > > > > > > > As can be seen from the reviews: > > > > > > > > - sleeps between DSI calls > > > > - properly propagating the error at the end of the function > > > > > > These two are legitimate feedback, but I don't see how coccinelle > cannot > > > deal with them. > > > > Maybe it can. both issues were pointed out during review of the first > > series, there was no improvement here. I'd really ask to perform > > conversion of a single driver, so that the script (or post-script > > fixups) can be improved. I'd still expect that Anusha actually reviews > > the changed driver before posting it and verifies that there is no > > regression in the logic / error reporting. > > Yeah, it makes sense, thanks! > Dmitry, Doug, Sorry for the late response, I was out. A lot of the confusion and effort could have been saved had I worked on the -misc branch. My bad. WIll keep the rest of the feedback in mind and address one driver at a time to avoid an overhaul of changes. Thanks for taking time out to guide me in the right direction! Anusha > Maxime >