On 7/7/23 17:26, Paulo Pavacic wrote:
Hello Marek,
Hi,
čet, 6. srp 2023. u 17:26 Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> napisao je:
On 7/6/23 17:18, Paulo Pavacic wrote:
Hello Linus,
čet, 22. lip 2023. u 10:22 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> napisao je:
On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 5:09 PM Paulo Pavacic <pavacic.p@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
A lot of modifications to st7701 are required. I believe it would
result in a driver that doesn't look or work the same. e.g compare
delays between initialization sequences of panel-fannal-c3004 and
panel-st7701. I think it would be optimal to create st7701s driver and
have special handling for st7701s panels. If there was a flag for
whether panel is st7701 or st7701s it would end up looking like a
mess.
What matters is if the original authors of the old st7701 driver are
around and reviewing and testing patches at all. What we need is
active maintainers. (Added Jagan, Marek & Maya).
I buy the reasoning that the st7701s is perhaps substantially different
from st7701.
If st7701s is very different then I suppose it needs a separate driver,
then all we need to to name the driver properly, i.e.
panel-sitronix-st7701s.c.
I had in person talk with Paul Kocialkowski and I have concluded that
this is the best solution.
I believe I should rename it to st7701s due to the hardware changes. I
would like to create V5 patch with driver renamed to st7701s.
Please let me know if you agree / disagree.
If I recall it right, the ST7701 and ST7701S are basically the same
chip, aren't they ?
I'm currently exploring all the differences. There aren't a lot of
differences, but there are some.
So far I can see that default register values are different, new
previously unused registers are now used and there has been some
reordering of how info is placed in registers [1] (data bits are in
different order). Moreover, instructions to some commands have been
changed and meaning of what data bits mean [2][3]. Also, new features
have been added [2]; there is now PCLKS 3 for example.
You can see few differences in following images. Same images were
attached in this mail:
[1] https://ibb.co/NmgbZmy - GAMACTRL_st7701.png
[2] https://ibb.co/G79y235 - PCLKS2.png
Ouch. I wonder if this is still something that can be abstracted out
with some helper accessor functions like:
if (model == ST7701)
write something
else
write the other layout
Or whether it makes sense to outright have a separate driver. The later
would introduce duplication, but maybe that much duplication is OK.
