Hi Thierry,
Thank you for the comments.
On 04/29/2014 06:25 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 05:05:24PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Hi YoungJun,
On Tuesday 22 April 2014 10:24:39 YoungJun Cho wrote:
On 04/22/2014 08:00 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Hi YoungJun,
Thank you for the patch.
On Monday 21 April 2014 21:28:37 YoungJun Cho wrote:
This patch adds MIPI-DSI command mode based S6E3FA0 AMOLED LCD Panel
driver.
Changelog v2:
- Declares delay, size properties in probe routine instead of DT
Changelog v3:
- Moves CPU timings relevant properties from FIMD DT
(commented by Laurent Pinchart, Andrzej Hajda)
Signed-off-by: YoungJun Cho <yj44.cho@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Inki Dae <inki.dae@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/panel/Kconfig | 7 +
drivers/gpu/drm/panel/Makefile | 1 +
drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-s6e3fa0.c | 569 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 577 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-s6e3fa0.c
[snip]
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-s6e3fa0.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-s6e3fa0.c new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1282678
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-s6e3fa0.c
@@ -0,0 +1,569 @@
[snip]
+static int s6e3fa0_get_modes(struct drm_panel *panel)
+{
+ struct drm_connector *connector = panel->connector;
+ struct s6e3fa0 *ctx = panel_to_s6e3fa0(panel);
+ struct drm_display_mode *mode;
+
+ mode = drm_mode_create(connector->dev);
+ if (!mode) {
+ DRM_ERROR("failed to create a new display mode\n");
+ return 0;
+ }
+
+ drm_display_mode_from_videomode(&ctx->vm, mode);
+ mode->width_mm = ctx->width_mm;
+ mode->height_mm = ctx->height_mm;
+ connector->display_info.width_mm = mode->width_mm;
+ connector->display_info.height_mm = mode->height_mm;
+
+ mode->type = DRM_MODE_TYPE_DRIVER | DRM_MODE_TYPE_PREFERRED;
+ mode->private = (void *)&ctx->cpu_timings;
Wouldn't it make sense to create a new get_interface_params (or similar)
operation for drm_panel to query interface configuration parameters
instead of shoving it in the mode private field ?
You mean "new get_interface_params operation" is different from
get_modes() ?
Till now, struct drm_display_mode and most of mode relevant APIs are
only for video interface.
And CPU interface also needs video mode configurations.
I have a plan to implement the CPU interface relevant APIs like video
mode ones, but I think they should be used under current DRM mode APIs
like fill_modes, get_modes and so on.
So after that implementation, this private field will be replaced by
new ones.
Could you explain it in more detail?
The idea is that the interface parameters (RD/WR signals timings in this case,
but this could also include MIPI DSI lane configuration or any other kind of
physical interface parameters) are distinct from the video modes.
We already have the lanes field in struct mipi_dsi_device. I think in
general I'd prefer to not spread these parameters around too wildly. If
this is a general requirement for DBI devices, perhaps what we need is
struct mipi_dbi_device?
Even though it requires CPU mode relevant parameters,
this is also mipi dsi interface.
So I think struct mipi_dsi_device is enough.
Thank you.
Best regards YJ
Thierry
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
