Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 8 Mar 2023 17:04:54 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] pwm: mtk-disp: Fix backlight configuration at boot | From | AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <> |
| |
Il 08/03/23 16:43, Greg Kroah-Hartman ha scritto: > On Wed, Mar 08, 2023 at 03:55:59PM +0100, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: >> Il 08/03/23 15:50, Greg Kroah-Hartman ha scritto: >>> On Wed, Mar 08, 2023 at 12:46:07PM +0100, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: >>>> Il 23/02/23 15:16, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno ha scritto: >>>>> Il 23/01/23 17:06, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno ha scritto: >>>>>> Since the pwm-mtk-disp driver was fixed to get PWM_EN state from the >>>>>> right register, an old two-wrongs-make-one-right issue emerged: as a >>>>>> result, MT8192 Asurada Spherion got no backlight at boot unless a >>>>>> suspend/resume cycle was performed. >>>>>> Also, the backlight would sometimes not get updated with the requested >>>>>> value, requiring the user to change it back and forth until it worked. >>>>>> >>>>>> This series fixes both of the aforementioned issues found on MT8192. >>>>>> >>>>>> AngeloGioacchino Del Regno (2): >>>>>> pwm: mtk-disp: Disable shadow registers before setting backlight >>>>>> values >>>>>> pwm: mtk-disp: Configure double buffering before reading in >>>>>> .get_state() >>>>>> >>>>>> drivers/pwm/pwm-mtk-disp.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Gentle ping for this one: this is fixing backlight issues on multiple MediaTek >>>>> SoCs and was well tested. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Angelo >>>> >>>> Since this series was sent more than one month ago, and since this fixes broken >>>> backlight on a number of Chromebooks with MT8183 and MT8192 SoCs, and seen the >>>> urgency of getting these fixes in, I'm adding Greg to the loop. >>> >>> $ ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl drivers/pwm/pwm-mtk-disp.c >>> Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> (maintainer:PWM SUBSYSTEM) >>> "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> (reviewer:PWM SUBSYSTEM) >>> Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com> (maintainer:ARM/Mediatek SoC support) >>> AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com> (reviewer:ARM/Mediatek SoC support) >>> linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org (open list:PWM SUBSYSTEM) >>> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org (open list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support) >>> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org (moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support) >>> linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org (moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support) >>> >>> I don't see my name in there, did I become the PWM maintainer somehow? >>> >>> What's wrong with Thierry taking this like normal? >>> >> >> Nothing wrong with that. I felt like this series got ignored as I've never >> received any reply from Thierry, even though it's a Fixes series that I deem >> to be moderately urgent; that's why I added you to the loop. > > Then ask Thierry and Uwe, what would you want to have happen if you were > the maintainer of a subsystem? > >> If that created unnecessary noise, I'm extremely sorry and won't happen again. > > Not noise, just confusion on my part. I'm glad to take patches that > have no obvious maintainers, or maintainers that have disappeared, but > that doesn't seem to be the case here. > > Also remember that we had the merge window, which is 2 weeks of us not > being able to take any new code at all, even for fixes. > > And finally, to make it easier for your code to be accepted, please take > the time to review other's code for the subsystems you care about to > make the maintainer's load easier. If you do that, you will often find > your patches getting faster response just by virtue of there being less > work to do on the subsystem overall. Why not do that right now to help > out with other PWM patches? > > thanks, > > greg k-h >
That's right, I see the point. Will try to help as soon as I can find BW.
Thanks and sorry again, Angelo
| |