From: "Jason-JH.Lin" jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com
This reverts commit ac88a1f41f93499df6f50fd18ea835e6ff4f3200.
Reason for revert: 1. The commit [1] does not land on linux-5.15, so this patch does not fix anything.
2. Since the fw_device improvements series [2] does not land on linux-5.15, using device_set_fwnode() causes the panel to flash during bootup.
Incorrect link management may lead to incorrect device initialization, affecting firmware node links and consumer relationships. The fwnode setting of panel to the DSI device would cause a DSI initialization error without series[2], so this patch was reverted to avoid using the incomplete fw_devlink functionality.
[1] commit 3fb16866b51d ("driver core: fw_devlink: Make cycle detection more robust") [2] Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230207014207.1678715-1-saravanak@google.com
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.15.169 Signed-off-by: Jason-JH.Lin jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com --- drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.c index 24606b632009..468a3a7cb6a5 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.c @@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ mipi_dsi_device_register_full(struct mipi_dsi_host *host, return dsi; }
- device_set_node(&dsi->dev, of_fwnode_handle(info->node)); + dsi->dev.of_node = info->node; dsi->channel = info->channel; strlcpy(dsi->name, info->type, sizeof(dsi->name));
--- base-commit: 74cdd62cb4706515b454ce5bacb73b566c1d1bcf change-id: 20241024-fixup-5-15-5fdd68dae707
Best regards,
On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 06:30:01PM +0800, Jason-JH.Lin via B4 Relay wrote:
From: "Jason-JH.Lin" jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com
This reverts commit ac88a1f41f93499df6f50fd18ea835e6ff4f3200.
Reason for revert:
- The commit [1] does not land on linux-5.15, so this patch does not
fix anything.
- Since the fw_device improvements series [2] does not land on
linux-5.15, using device_set_fwnode() causes the panel to flash during bootup.
Incorrect link management may lead to incorrect device initialization, affecting firmware node links and consumer relationships. The fwnode setting of panel to the DSI device would cause a DSI initialization error without series[2], so this patch was reverted to avoid using the incomplete fw_devlink functionality.
[1] commit 3fb16866b51d ("driver core: fw_devlink: Make cycle detection more robust") [2] Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230207014207.1678715-1-saravanak@google.com
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.15.169
What about 5.10.y and 5.4.y as well? Aren't those also affected?
thanks,
greg k-h
On Mon, 2024-10-28 at 06:38 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until you have verified the sender or the content.
On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 06:30:01PM +0800, Jason-JH.Lin via B4 Relay wrote:
From: "Jason-JH.Lin" jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com
This reverts commit ac88a1f41f93499df6f50fd18ea835e6ff4f3200.
Reason for revert:
- The commit [1] does not land on linux-5.15, so this patch does
not fix anything.
- Since the fw_device improvements series [2] does not land on
linux-5.15, using device_set_fwnode() causes the panel to flash during bootup.
Incorrect link management may lead to incorrect device initialization, affecting firmware node links and consumer relationships. The fwnode setting of panel to the DSI device would cause a DSI initialization error without series[2], so this patch was reverted to avoid using the incomplete fw_devlink functionality.
[1] commit 3fb16866b51d ("driver core: fw_devlink: Make cycle detection more robust") [2] Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230207014207.1678715-1-saravanak@google.com
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.15.169
What about 5.10.y and 5.4.y as well? Aren't those also affected?
Oh, Yes.
I'll send v3 for these versions as well.
BTW, how can I know what other branches should I revert the patch as well? Just in case I missed it in another branch.
Regards, Jason-JH.Lin
thanks,
greg k-h
[snip]
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.15.169
What about 5.10.y and 5.4.y as well? Aren't those also affected?
Oh, Yes.
I'll send v3 for these versions as well.
BTW, how can I know what other branches should I revert the patch as well? Just in case I missed it in another branch.
I think I found that in the longterm release kernel version: https://kernel.org/category/releases.html
I'll send the v3 soon. Thanks!
Regards, Jason-JH.Lin
Regards, Jason-JH.Lin
thanks,
greg k-h
On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 06:08:15AM +0000, Jason-JH Lin (林睿祥) wrote:
On Mon, 2024-10-28 at 06:38 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until you have verified the sender or the content.
On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 06:30:01PM +0800, Jason-JH.Lin via B4 Relay wrote:
From: "Jason-JH.Lin" jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com
This reverts commit ac88a1f41f93499df6f50fd18ea835e6ff4f3200.
Reason for revert:
- The commit [1] does not land on linux-5.15, so this patch does
not fix anything.
- Since the fw_device improvements series [2] does not land on
linux-5.15, using device_set_fwnode() causes the panel to flash during bootup.
Incorrect link management may lead to incorrect device initialization, affecting firmware node links and consumer relationships. The fwnode setting of panel to the DSI device would cause a DSI initialization error without series[2], so this patch was reverted to avoid using the incomplete fw_devlink functionality.
[1] commit 3fb16866b51d ("driver core: fw_devlink: Make cycle detection more robust") [2] Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230207014207.1678715-1-saravanak@google.com
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.15.169
What about 5.10.y and 5.4.y as well? Aren't those also affected?
Oh, Yes.
I'll send v3 for these versions as well.
Thank you.
BTW, how can I know what other branches should I revert the patch as well? Just in case I missed it in another branch.
You can look at all the branches to verify if it has been applied or not. There are some tools that do this for you, I use the one I created that can be found at: https://git.sr.ht/~gregkh/linux-stable_commit_tree
thanks,
greg k-h
[snip]
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.15.169
What about 5.10.y and 5.4.y as well? Aren't those also affected?
Oh, Yes.
I'll send v3 for these versions as well.
Thank you.
BTW, how can I know what other branches should I revert the patch as well? Just in case I missed it in another branch.
You can look at all the branches to verify if it has been applied or not. There are some tools that do this for you, I use the one I created that can be found at: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.sr.ht/*gregkh/linux-stable_commit_tr...
Got it. Thanks for your help!
Regards, Jason-JH.Lin
thanks,
greg k-h
linux-stable-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Greg KH -
gregkh＠linuxfoundation.org
-
Jason-JH Lin (林睿祥) -
Jason-JH.Lin via B4 Relay