Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] drm/bridge: Add devm_drm_bridge_add()

[Doug Anderson]

Maxime,

On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 10:00 AM Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, May 21, 2022 at 2:17 AM Maxime Ripard <maxime@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 12:29:43PM -0700, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> > > This adds a devm managed version of drm_bridge_add(). Like other
> > > "devm" function listed in drm_bridge.h, this function takes an
> > > explicit "dev" to use for the lifetime management. A few notes:
> > > * In general we have a "struct device" for bridges that makes a good
> > >   candidate for where the lifetime matches exactly what we want.
> > > * The "bridge->dev->dev" device appears to be the encoder
> > >   device. That's not the right device to use for lifetime management.
> > >
> > > Suggested-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > If we are to introduce more managed helpers, I think it'd be wiser to
> > introduce them as DRM-managed, and not device managed.
> >
> > Otherwise, you'll end up in a weird state when a device has been removed
> > but the DRM device is still around.
>
> I'm kinda confused. In this case there is no DRM device for the bridge
> and, as per my CL description, "bridge-dev->dev" appears to be the
> encoder device. I wasn't personally involved in discussions about it,
> but I was under the impression that this was expected / normal. Thus
> we can't make this DRM-managed.

Since I didn't hear a reply, I'll assume that my response addressed
your concerns. Assuming I get reviews for the other two patches in
this series I'll plan to land this with Dmitry's review.

-Doug