Re: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] drm: bridge: adv7511: Add support for ADV7535

[Schrempf Frieder]

Hi Bogdan,

On 21.08.19 07:34, Togorean, Bogdan wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-08-20 at 10:53 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> [External]
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 12:46:16PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
>>> Hi Bogdan.
>>>
>>>>>>   		adv7533_detach_dsi(adv7511);
>>>>>>   	i2c_unregister_device(adv7511->i2c_cec);
>>>>>>   	if (adv7511->cec_clk)
>>>>>> @@ -1266,8 +1278,9 @@ static const struct i2c_device_id
>>>>>> adv7511_i2c_ids[] = {
>>>>>>   	{ "adv7511", ADV7511 },
>>>>>>   	{ "adv7511w", ADV7511 },
>>>>>>   	{ "adv7513", ADV7511 },
>>>>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_DRM_I2C_ADV7533
>>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_DRM_I2C_ADV753x
>>>>>>   	{ "adv7533", ADV7533 },
>>>>>> +	{ "adv7535", ADV7535 },
>>>>>>   #endif
>>>>>
>>>>> This ifdef may not be needed??
>>>>> If we did not get this type we will not look it up.
>>>> But if we have defined in DT adv7533/5 device but
>>>> CONFIG_DRM_I2C_ADV753x not selected probe will fail with ENODEV.
>>>> That
>>>> would be ok?
>>>
>>> What do we gain from this complexity in the end.
>>> Why not let the driver always support all variants.
>>>
>>> If this result in a simpler driver, and less choices in Kconfig
>>> then it is a win-win.
>>
>> Yeah in general we don't Kconfig within drivers in drm to disable
>> specific
>> code-paths. It's not worth the pain.
 >
> Ack,
> Thank you for clarification. Will remove in V3.

Are you still working on this? Do you plan to send a v3?
I will soon lay my hands on a board with the ADV7535 and would like to 
see this merged.
Also for patch 1/2, it seems you already have a R-b for v1 from Laurent, 
but you didn't carry the tag to v2.

Thanks,
Frieder