[PATCH v10 11/18] drm/bridge: analogix_dp: Apply drm_bridge_connector helper

[Damon Ding]

On 3/16/2026 7:39 PM, Luca Ceresoli wrote:
> On Mon Mar 16, 2026 at 4:17 AM CET, Damon Ding wrote:
>> Hi Luca,
>>
>> On 3/14/2026 1:10 AM, Luca Ceresoli wrote:
>>> Hello Damon,
>>>
>>> On Tue Mar 10, 2026 at 2:24 AM CET, Damon Ding wrote:
>>>> Initialize bridge_connector for both Rockchip and Exynos encoder sides.
>>>> Then, make DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR mandatory for Analogix bridge
>>>> side, as the private &drm_connector is no longer created.
>>>>
>>>> The previous &drm_connector_funcs and &drm_connector_helper_funcs APIs
>>>> are replaced by the corresponding &drm_bridge_funcs APIs:
>>>>
>>>> analogix_dp_atomic_check() -> analogix_dp_bridge_atomic_check()
>>>> analogix_dp_detect()       -> analogix_dp_bridge_detect()
>>>> analogix_dp_get_modes()    -> analogix_dp_bridge_get_modes()
>>>>                                 analogix_dp_bridge_edid_read()
>>>>
>>>> Additionally, the compatibilities of Analogix DP bridge based on whether
>>>> the next bridge is a 'panel'. If it is, OP_MODES and OP_DETECT are
>>>> supported; If not (the next bridge is a 'monitor' or a bridge chip),
>>>> OP_EDID and OP_DETECT are supported.
>>>>
>>>> The devm_drm_bridge_add() is placed in analogix_dp_bind() instead of
>>>> analogix_dp_probe(), because the type of next bridge (the panel, monitor
>>>> or bridge chip) can only be determined after the probe process has fully
>>>> completed.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Damon Ding <damon.ding at rock-chips.com>
>>>> Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski at samsung.com>
>>>> Tested-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko at sntech.de> (on rk3588)
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> @@ -73,15 +72,12 @@ static int exynos_dp_bridge_attach(struct analogix_dp_plat_data *plat_data,
>>>>    				   struct drm_bridge *bridge)
>>>>    {
>>>>    	struct exynos_dp_device *dp = to_dp(plat_data);
>>>> -	enum drm_bridge_attach_flags flags = 0;
>>>>    	int ret;
>>>>
>>>>    	/* Pre-empt DP connector creation if there's a bridge */
>>>>    	if (plat_data->next_bridge) {
>>>> -		if (dp->has_of_bridge)
>>>> -			flags = DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR;
>>>> -
>>>> -		ret = drm_bridge_attach(&dp->encoder, plat_data->next_bridge, bridge, flags);
>>>> +		ret = drm_bridge_attach(&dp->encoder, plat_data->next_bridge, bridge,
>>>> +					DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR);
>>>
>>> Should this be 'flags | DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR' to be future-proof?
>>>
>>
>> Aha, the exynos_dp_bridge_attach() and even
>> &analogix_dp_plat_data.attach() have been removed in [PATCH v10 16/18]
>> for consistency and simplification. Since the only bridge flag supported
>> right now is DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR, let’s leave this as is for
>> now. ;-)
> 
> As you are going to send v11, I'd do that change. It is the right thing do
> to, it's cheap, and in case patches up to 11/18 but not (yet) up to 16/18
> we avoid ending up with unoptimal code until patch 16/18 is applied.
> 

Yes, I will fix this in v11.

Best regards,
Damon