On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 02:36:27PM +0000, Emil Velikov wrote: > Hi Sean, > > On 16 March 2017 at 22:08, Sean Paul <seanpaul@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > This series pulls out the power-sequencing code from panel-simple into a > > panel-common helper library. This allows drivers that cannot leverage > > panel-simple to share some code. > > > > I've converted the 2 sharp mipi drivers, and Chris Zhong's driver on the > > list can also be converted. I haven't checked any other drivers, but I > > suspect we'll see the same code blocks there too. > > > > I'm sure there's more we can pull out of the various drivers, but this > > seems like a good place to start talking about how to share common panel > > code across drivers. > > > Fwiw I think that the idea is good, but I'm wondering on the following > architectural questions: Hey Emil, Thanks for your feedback! > - Shouldn't prepared and enabled be part of struct drm_panel ? I don't think so. Not all panels need to worry about keeping track of the prepared/enabled state. > - Would it be better to subclass struct panel_common around struct drm_panel ? > > I might be threading the thin line of "midlayer vs helpers" here, so > please let me know if I've got it wrong. Yeah, you could do either. I was going for something more akin to the helpers we already have. If you went the subclass route, the drivers would need to subclass panel_common, which would subclass drm_panel. I figured it was too much unraveling to get at the important bits in the hooks that provide a drm_panel pointer. Nothing that a few to_* helpers couldn't solve, though. I was also thinking we could subclass panel_common if there's an opportunity to get something like mipi_dcs_panel_common to reduce the copypasta amongst mipi panels which execute a common dcs recipe. Sean > > Thanks > Emil -- Sean Paul, Software Engineer, Google / Chromium OS _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
