[PATCH v4 2/3] drm/bridge: microchip-lvds: switch to use atomic variants

Dharma Balasubiramani posted 3 patches 3 months, 2 weeks ago
There is a newer version of this series
[PATCH v4 2/3] drm/bridge: microchip-lvds: switch to use atomic variants
Posted by Dharma Balasubiramani 3 months, 2 weeks ago
Modernize the bridge ops to use atomic_enable/disable.

Signed-off-by: Dharma Balasubiramani <dharma.b@microchip.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c
index 42751124b868..e4ff46b03d54 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c
@@ -111,7 +111,8 @@ static int mchp_lvds_attach(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
 				 bridge, flags);
 }
 
-static void mchp_lvds_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
+static void mchp_lvds_atomic_pre_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
+					struct drm_atomic_state *state)
 {
 	struct mchp_lvds *lvds = bridge_to_lvds(bridge);
 	int ret;
@@ -127,11 +128,26 @@ static void mchp_lvds_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
 		dev_err(lvds->dev, "failed to get pm runtime: %d\n", ret);
 		return;
 	}
+}
 
+static void mchp_lvds_atomic_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
+				    struct drm_atomic_state *state)
+{
+	struct mchp_lvds *lvds = bridge_to_lvds(bridge);
 	lvds_serialiser_on(lvds);
 }
 
-static void mchp_lvds_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
+static void mchp_lvds_atomic_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
+				     struct drm_atomic_state *state)
+{
+	struct mchp_lvds *lvds = bridge_to_lvds(bridge);
+
+	/* Turn off the serialiser */
+	lvds_writel(lvds, LVDSC_CR, 0);
+}
+
+static void mchp_lvds_atomic_post_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
+					  struct drm_atomic_state *state)
 {
 	struct mchp_lvds *lvds = bridge_to_lvds(bridge);
 
@@ -141,8 +157,10 @@ static void mchp_lvds_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
 
 static const struct drm_bridge_funcs mchp_lvds_bridge_funcs = {
 	.attach = mchp_lvds_attach,
-	.enable = mchp_lvds_enable,
-	.disable = mchp_lvds_disable,
+	.atomic_pre_enable = mchp_lvds_atomic_pre_enable,
+	.atomic_enable = mchp_lvds_atomic_enable,
+	.atomic_disable = mchp_lvds_atomic_disable,
+	.atomic_post_disable = mchp_lvds_atomic_post_disable,
 };
 
 static int mchp_lvds_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)

-- 
2.43.0
Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] drm/bridge: microchip-lvds: switch to use atomic variants
Posted by Maxime Ripard 3 months, 2 weeks ago
On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 02:54:15PM +0530, Dharma Balasubiramani wrote:
> Modernize the bridge ops to use atomic_enable/disable.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dharma Balasubiramani <dharma.b@microchip.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c
> index 42751124b868..e4ff46b03d54 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c
> @@ -111,7 +111,8 @@ static int mchp_lvds_attach(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
>  				 bridge, flags);
>  }
>  
> -static void mchp_lvds_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
> +static void mchp_lvds_atomic_pre_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
> +					struct drm_atomic_state *state)
>  {
>  	struct mchp_lvds *lvds = bridge_to_lvds(bridge);
>  	int ret;
> @@ -127,11 +128,26 @@ static void mchp_lvds_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
>  		dev_err(lvds->dev, "failed to get pm runtime: %d\n", ret);
>  		return;
>  	}
> +}
>  
> +static void mchp_lvds_atomic_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
> +				    struct drm_atomic_state *state)
> +{
> +	struct mchp_lvds *lvds = bridge_to_lvds(bridge);
>  	lvds_serialiser_on(lvds);
>  }
>
> -static void mchp_lvds_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
> +static void mchp_lvds_atomic_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
> +				     struct drm_atomic_state *state)
> +{
> +	struct mchp_lvds *lvds = bridge_to_lvds(bridge);
> +
> +	/* Turn off the serialiser */
> +	lvds_writel(lvds, LVDSC_CR, 0);
> +}
> +
> +static void mchp_lvds_atomic_post_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
> +					  struct drm_atomic_state *state)
>  {
>  	struct mchp_lvds *lvds = bridge_to_lvds(bridge);
>  
> @@ -141,8 +157,10 @@ static void mchp_lvds_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
>  
>  static const struct drm_bridge_funcs mchp_lvds_bridge_funcs = {
>  	.attach = mchp_lvds_attach,
> -	.enable = mchp_lvds_enable,
> -	.disable = mchp_lvds_disable,
> +	.atomic_pre_enable = mchp_lvds_atomic_pre_enable,
> +	.atomic_enable = mchp_lvds_atomic_enable,
> +	.atomic_disable = mchp_lvds_atomic_disable,
> +	.atomic_post_disable = mchp_lvds_atomic_post_disable,
>  };

Like I said to you earlier today, it's not just what you claim it is.
You're splitting enable into atomic_pre_enable and atomic_enable, and
disable into atomic_disable and atomic_post_disable.

At the *very* least this should be explained in your commit log, and it
would be much better if it was done in another patch.

Maxime
Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] drm/bridge: microchip-lvds: switch to use atomic variants
Posted by Dharma.B@microchip.com 3 months, 2 weeks ago
On 24/06/25 4:32 pm, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 02:54:15PM +0530, Dharma Balasubiramani wrote:
>> Modernize the bridge ops to use atomic_enable/disable.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dharma Balasubiramani <dharma.b@microchip.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++----
>>   1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c
>> index 42751124b868..e4ff46b03d54 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c
>> @@ -111,7 +111,8 @@ static int mchp_lvds_attach(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
>>   				 bridge, flags);
>>   }
>>   
>> -static void mchp_lvds_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
>> +static void mchp_lvds_atomic_pre_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
>> +					struct drm_atomic_state *state)
>>   {
>>   	struct mchp_lvds *lvds = bridge_to_lvds(bridge);
>>   	int ret;
>> @@ -127,11 +128,26 @@ static void mchp_lvds_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
>>   		dev_err(lvds->dev, "failed to get pm runtime: %d\n", ret);
>>   		return;
>>   	}
>> +}
>>   
>> +static void mchp_lvds_atomic_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
>> +				    struct drm_atomic_state *state)
>> +{
>> +	struct mchp_lvds *lvds = bridge_to_lvds(bridge);
>>   	lvds_serialiser_on(lvds);
>>   }
>>
>> -static void mchp_lvds_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
>> +static void mchp_lvds_atomic_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
>> +				     struct drm_atomic_state *state)
>> +{
>> +	struct mchp_lvds *lvds = bridge_to_lvds(bridge);
>> +
>> +	/* Turn off the serialiser */
>> +	lvds_writel(lvds, LVDSC_CR, 0);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void mchp_lvds_atomic_post_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
>> +					  struct drm_atomic_state *state)
>>   {
>>   	struct mchp_lvds *lvds = bridge_to_lvds(bridge);
>>   
>> @@ -141,8 +157,10 @@ static void mchp_lvds_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
>>   
>>   static const struct drm_bridge_funcs mchp_lvds_bridge_funcs = {
>>   	.attach = mchp_lvds_attach,
>> -	.enable = mchp_lvds_enable,
>> -	.disable = mchp_lvds_disable,
>> +	.atomic_pre_enable = mchp_lvds_atomic_pre_enable,
>> +	.atomic_enable = mchp_lvds_atomic_enable,
>> +	.atomic_disable = mchp_lvds_atomic_disable,
>> +	.atomic_post_disable = mchp_lvds_atomic_post_disable,
>>   };
> 
> Like I said to you earlier today, it's not just what you claim it is.
> You're splitting enable into atomic_pre_enable and atomic_enable, and
> disable into atomic_disable and atomic_post_disable.
> 
> At the *very* least this should be explained in your commit log, and it
> would be much better if it was done in another patch.

Sure, I’ll split the changes into two commits:

1. Convert .enable → atomic_enable() and .disable → atomic_disable()

2. Introduce atomic_pre_enable() and atomic_post_disable(), moving the 
sleepable operations accordingly.


> 
> Maxime


-- 
With Best Regards,
Dharma B.