Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1285766 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] video: fbdev: pxafb: initial devicetree conversion

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] video: fbdev: pxafb: initial devicetree conversion Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com> - 2015-12-07 17:30 +0100
    Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] video: fbdev: pxafb: initial devicetree conversion Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr> - 2015-12-07 22:00 +0100
      Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] video: fbdev: pxafb: initial devicetree conversion Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com> - 2015-12-10 16:30 +0100
        Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] video: fbdev: pxafb: initial devicetree conversion Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr> - 2015-12-10 18:40 +0100

#1285766 — Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] video: fbdev: pxafb: initial devicetree conversion

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 17/11/15 22:32, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
> This patch brings a first support of pxa framebuffer devices to a
> devicetree pxa platform, as was before platform data.
> 
> There are restrictions with this port, the biggest one being the lack of
> support of smart panels. Moreover the conversion doesn't provide a way
> to declare multiple framebuffer configurations with different bits per
> pixel, only the LCD hardware bus width is used.
> 
> The patch was tested on both pxa25x, pxa27x and pxa3xx platform (namely
> lubbock, mainstone and zylonite).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>
> ---
> Since v1: Philipp's review: of_graph usage
> Since v3: of_device_id sentinel, and all compatible ids added
> Since v4: fixed of_device_id table : rebase error on my side, with
>           braces which were incorrectly added
> ---
>  drivers/video/fbdev/Kconfig |   2 +
>  drivers/video/fbdev/pxafb.c | 163 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  2 files changed, 162 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

I see we already have
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/marvell,pxa2xx-lcdc.txt in the
mainline. I think the patch adding the binding doc should have been kept
in this series.

It seems that at least "depth" is missing from the binding document.

 Tomi

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1285923

Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com> writes:

> On 17/11/15 22:32, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
>> This patch brings a first support of pxa framebuffer devices to a
>> devicetree pxa platform, as was before platform data.
>> 
>> There are restrictions with this port, the biggest one being the lack of
>> support of smart panels. Moreover the conversion doesn't provide a way
>> to declare multiple framebuffer configurations with different bits per
>> pixel, only the LCD hardware bus width is used.
>> 
>> The patch was tested on both pxa25x, pxa27x and pxa3xx platform (namely
>> lubbock, mainstone and zylonite).
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>
>> ---
>> Since v1: Philipp's review: of_graph usage
>> Since v3: of_device_id sentinel, and all compatible ids added
>> Since v4: fixed of_device_id table : rebase error on my side, with
>>           braces which were incorrectly added
>> ---
>>  drivers/video/fbdev/Kconfig |   2 +
>>  drivers/video/fbdev/pxafb.c | 163 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>  2 files changed, 162 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> I see we already have
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/marvell,pxa2xx-lcdc.txt in the
> mainline. I think the patch adding the binding doc should have been kept
> in this series.
Ah, I think Rob took it through his tree already. Probably my fault also, I hope
I had not forgotten to Cc: you on the binding patch ...

> It seems that at least "depth" is missing from the binding document.
You're right.

Actually depth is not a "hardware" caracteristic. Moreover it's just used as an
overlay for pxafb_set_pixfmt() to superseed var->bits_per_pixel. I'm wondering
if the right path for of_get_pxafb_mode_info() would be to remove completely
depth, and leave it initialized at 0 for the DT case.

What do you think of this approach ? The other one would be to modify the
binding, and yet I feel this depth doesn't belong to the binding, it's my patch
which requires another spin IMHO.

Cheers.

-- 
Robert
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1288599

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 07/12/15 22:50, Robert Jarzmik wrote:

>> It seems that at least "depth" is missing from the binding document.
> You're right.
> 
> Actually depth is not a "hardware" caracteristic. Moreover it's just used as an
> overlay for pxafb_set_pixfmt() to superseed var->bits_per_pixel. I'm wondering
> if the right path for of_get_pxafb_mode_info() would be to remove completely
> depth, and leave it initialized at 0 for the DT case.
> 
> What do you think of this approach ? The other one would be to modify the
> binding, and yet I feel this depth doesn't belong to the binding, it's my patch
> which requires another spin IMHO.

Yes, we should avoid non-hardware relate properties in the .dts files if
at all possible. If the driver works fine without the property, I think
it's fine to remove it. If it is required it needs to be added to the
binding document.

 Tomi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1288715

Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com> writes:

> On 07/12/15 22:50, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
>
>>> It seems that at least "depth" is missing from the binding document.
>> You're right.
>> 
>> Actually depth is not a "hardware" caracteristic. Moreover it's just used as an
>> overlay for pxafb_set_pixfmt() to superseed var->bits_per_pixel. I'm wondering
>> if the right path for of_get_pxafb_mode_info() would be to remove completely
>> depth, and leave it initialized at 0 for the DT case.
>> 
>> What do you think of this approach ? The other one would be to modify the
>> binding, and yet I feel this depth doesn't belong to the binding, it's my patch
>> which requires another spin IMHO.
>
> Yes, we should avoid non-hardware relate properties in the .dts files if
> at all possible. If the driver works fine without the property, I think
> it's fine to remove it. If it is required it needs to be added to the
> binding document.

Ok, agreed Tomi. That commits me for a v6, as the driver works fine on my
tests. I'll send it in the next couple of days.

Thanks for the review.

-- 
Robert
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web