As reported by Laurent in response to this commit[1], this functionality should
not be implemented using the devicetree, because of this let's revert this series
for now.

This reverts commit c312b0df3b13e4c533743bb2c37fd1bc237368e5.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220902153906.31000-2-macroalpha82@gmail.com/

Signed-off-by: Robert Foss <robert.foss@linaro.org>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c | 28 ---------------------------
 1 file changed, 28 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
index 3c3561942eb6..6e053e2af229 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
@@ -29,7 +29,6 @@
 #include <drm/drm_atomic_helper.h>
 #include <drm/drm_bridge.h>
 #include <drm/drm_bridge_connector.h>
-#include <drm/drm_edid.h>
 #include <drm/drm_mipi_dsi.h>
 #include <drm/drm_of.h>
 #include <drm/drm_panel.h>
@@ -69,7 +68,6 @@
 #define  BPP_18_RGB				BIT(0)
 #define SN_HPD_DISABLE_REG			0x5C
 #define  HPD_DISABLE				BIT(0)
-#define  HPD_DEBOUNCED_STATE			BIT(4)
 #define SN_GPIO_IO_REG				0x5E
 #define  SN_GPIO_INPUT_SHIFT			4
 #define  SN_GPIO_OUTPUT_SHIFT			0
@@ -1160,33 +1158,10 @@ static void ti_sn_bridge_atomic_post_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
 	pm_runtime_put_sync(pdata->dev);
 }
 
-static enum drm_connector_status ti_sn_bridge_detect(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
-{
-	struct ti_sn65dsi86 *pdata = bridge_to_ti_sn65dsi86(bridge);
-	int val = 0;
-
-	pm_runtime_get_sync(pdata->dev);
-	regmap_read(pdata->regmap, SN_HPD_DISABLE_REG, &val);
-	pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(pdata->dev);
-
-	return val & HPD_DEBOUNCED_STATE ? connector_status_connected
-					 : connector_status_disconnected;
-}
-
-static struct edid *ti_sn_bridge_get_edid(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
-					  struct drm_connector *connector)
-{
-	struct ti_sn65dsi86 *pdata = bridge_to_ti_sn65dsi86(bridge);
-
-	return drm_get_edid(connector, &pdata->aux.ddc);
-}
-
 static const struct drm_bridge_funcs ti_sn_bridge_funcs = {
 	.attach = ti_sn_bridge_attach,
 	.detach = ti_sn_bridge_detach,
 	.mode_valid = ti_sn_bridge_mode_valid,
-	.get_edid = ti_sn_bridge_get_edid,
-	.detect = ti_sn_bridge_detect,
 	.atomic_pre_enable = ti_sn_bridge_atomic_pre_enable,
 	.atomic_enable = ti_sn_bridge_atomic_enable,
 	.atomic_disable = ti_sn_bridge_atomic_disable,
@@ -1282,9 +1257,6 @@ static int ti_sn_bridge_probe(struct auxiliary_device *adev,
 	pdata->bridge.type = pdata->next_bridge->type == DRM_MODE_CONNECTOR_DisplayPort
 			   ? DRM_MODE_CONNECTOR_DisplayPort : DRM_MODE_CONNECTOR_eDP;
 
-	if (pdata->bridge.type == DRM_MODE_CONNECTOR_DisplayPort)
-		pdata->bridge.ops = DRM_BRIDGE_OP_EDID | DRM_BRIDGE_OP_DETECT;
-
 	drm_bridge_add(&pdata->bridge);
 
 	ret = ti_sn_attach_host(pdata);
-- 
2.34.1

Robert,

On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 12:43 PM Robert Foss <robert.foss@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> As reported by Laurent in response to this commit[1], this functionality should
> not be implemented using the devicetree, because of this let's revert this series
> for now.
>
> This reverts commit c312b0df3b13e4c533743bb2c37fd1bc237368e5.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220902153906.31000-2-macroalpha82@gmail.com/
>
> Signed-off-by: Robert Foss <robert.foss@linaro.org>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c | 28 ---------------------------
>  1 file changed, 28 deletions(-)

Any chance you got confused and reverted the wrong patch? This
ti-sn65dsi86 patch doesn't seem relevant to the problems talked about
in the commit or the cover letter. Maybe I'm missing something?

-Doug

On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 03:29:52PM +0100, Doug Anderson wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 12:43 PM Robert Foss <robert.foss@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > As reported by Laurent in response to this commit[1], this functionality should
> > not be implemented using the devicetree, because of this let's revert this series
> > for now.
> >
> > This reverts commit c312b0df3b13e4c533743bb2c37fd1bc237368e5.
> >
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220902153906.31000-2-macroalpha82@gmail.com/
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Robert Foss <robert.foss@linaro.org>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c | 28 ---------------------------
> >  1 file changed, 28 deletions(-)
> 
> Any chance you got confused and reverted the wrong patch? This
> ti-sn65dsi86 patch doesn't seem relevant to the problems talked about
> in the commit or the cover letter. Maybe I'm missing something?

Aarghhh I missed that when checking the cover letter :-( This indeed
seems wrong.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

On Mon, 12 Sept 2022 at 16:43, Laurent Pinchart
<laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 03:29:52PM +0100, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 12:43 PM Robert Foss <robert.foss@linaro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > As reported by Laurent in response to this commit[1], this functionality should
> > > not be implemented using the devicetree, because of this let's revert this series
> > > for now.
> > >
> > > This reverts commit c312b0df3b13e4c533743bb2c37fd1bc237368e5.
> > >
> > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220902153906.31000-2-macroalpha82@gmail.com/
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Robert Foss <robert.foss@linaro.org>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c | 28 ---------------------------
> > >  1 file changed, 28 deletions(-)
> >
> > Any chance you got confused and reverted the wrong patch? This
> > ti-sn65dsi86 patch doesn't seem relevant to the problems talked about
> > in the commit or the cover letter. Maybe I'm missing something?
>
> Aarghhh I missed that when checking the cover letter :-( This indeed
> seems wrong.

Yep. This is a mistake. I copy/pasted the wrong line and then assumed
that ti-sn65dsi86 & chrontel-ch7033 shared a driver. I'll look into my
workflows to try to prevent future mistakes of this nature.

A series fixing this has been posted.
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220915102924.370090-1-robert.foss@linaro.org/

Thanks for catching this Doug!


Rob.