Em Wed, 19 Aug 2020 19:35:58 +0200
Sam Ravnborg [off-list ref] escreveu:

I'm already handling the other comments from your review (I'll send a
more complete comment about them after finishing), but I have a doubt
what you meant about this:

+static int kirin_drm_bind(struct device *dev)

quoted

+{
+	struct drm_driver *driver = &kirin_drm_driver;
+	struct drm_device *drm_dev;
+	struct kirin_drm_private *priv;
+	int ret;
+
+	drm_dev = drm_dev_alloc(driver, dev);
+	if (!drm_dev)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	ret = kirin_drm_kms_init(drm_dev);
+	if (ret)
+		goto err_drm_dev_unref;
+
+	ret = drm_dev_register(drm_dev, 0);  

There is better ways to do this. See drm_drv.c for the code example.

Not sure if I understood your comment here. The drm_drv.c example also calls 
drm_dev_register().

The only difference is that it calls it inside driver_probe(), while
on this driver, it uses:

	static const struct component_master_ops kirin_drm_ops = {
		.bind = kirin_drm_bind,
		.unbind = kirin_drm_unbind,
	};

	static int kirin_drm_platform_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
	{
...
		drm_of_component_match_add(dev, &match, compare_of, remote);
...
	return component_master_add_with_match(dev, &kirin_drm_ops, match);
}

Are you meaning that I should get rid of this component API and call
kirin_drm_bind() from kirin_drm_platform_probe()?

Thanks,
Mauro

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel