On 27/06/2025 11:40, Yongxing Mou wrote:
On 2025/6/25 22:03, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 08:34:18PM +0800, Yongxing Mou wrote:
On 2025/6/9 20:48, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Mon, Jun 09, 2025 at 08:21:21PM +0800, Yongxing Mou wrote:
From: Abhinav Kumar <[email protected]>
Originally, the drm_mode would be passed in
two stages: from msm_dp_display->msm_dp_mode to dp_panel-
>msm_dp_mode. Since
in MST mode each stream requires its own drm_mode and stored in
dp_panel, we
simplified the two-stage transfer into a single step (.mode_set() do all
things and store in msm_dp_panel). Meanwhile we modified the
msm_dp_display_set_mode function to accept a msm_dp_panel parameter,
allowing the MST bridge funcs' mode_set() to reuse this part code.
The following patches:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/657573/?series=142207&rev=2 and
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/657593/?series=142207&rev=2,
introduce msm_dp_display_*_helper functions to help reuse common code
across
MST/SST/eDP drm_bridge_funcs.
If we drop msm_dp_mode from dp_panel and use drm_display_mode, it might
introduce a large number of changes that are not directly related to
MST.
Actually i think the presence of msm_dp_display_mode seems to
simplify the
work in msm_dp_panel_timing_cfg(), this patch series we want to focus
on MST
parts, so would we consider optimizing them later?
Sure... But then you have to change two places. If you optimize it
first, you have to touch only place. And it can be even submitted
separately.
Understood, that’s indeed the case. I just want to prioritize the MST
patch and have it merged first, since it involves changes to lots of
files. Thanks~~
I'm sorry, I hit enter too quickly. The MST will not be merged until we
get DP HPD rework in, that's a prerequisite from my side. So, while that
is getting sorted out, we can fix minor issues and perform minor
cleanups, like the checksums or drm_mode refactoring.
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
