Hi,
On Wed, 2012-05-23 at 15:08 -0500, Andy Gross wrote:
> Register OMAP DRM/KMS platform device. DMM is split into a
> separate device using hwmod.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Gross <andy.gross@xxxxxx>
<snip>
> +static int __init omap_init_drm(void)
> +{
> + struct omap_hwmod *oh = NULL;
> + struct platform_device *pdev;
> +
> + /* lookup and populate the DMM information, if present - OMAP4+ */
> + oh = omap_hwmod_lookup("dmm");
> +
> + if (oh) {
> + pdev = omap_device_build(oh->name, -1, oh, NULL, 0, NULL, 0,
> + false);
> + WARN(IS_ERR(pdev), "Could not build omap_device for %s\n",
> + oh->name);
> + }
> +
> + return platform_device_register(&omap_drm_device);
> +
> +}
I still don't like fixing the tiler to drm. I would like to have basic
tiler support in omapfb also, but with this approach I'll need to
duplicate the code. And even if we disregard omapfb, wouldn't it be
architecturally better to have the tiler as a separate independent
library/driver?
> +struct omap_drm_platform_data {
> + struct omap_kms_platform_data *kms_pdata;
> +};
This one is missing struct omap_dmm_platform_data *dmm_pdata, so you
didn't just move the struct. Is that on purpose?
Tomi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
