Re: Best practice device tree design for display subsystems/DRM

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Sebastian Hesselbarth
<sebastian.hesselbarth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I am against a super node which contains lcd and dcon/ire nodes. You can
> enable those devices on a per board basis. We add them to dove.dtsi but
> disable them by default (status = "disabled").
>
> The DRM driver itself should get a video-card node outside of
> soc/internal-regs where you can put e.g. video memory hole (or video
> mem size if it will be taken from RAM later)

For completeness of the discussion, and my understanding too, can you
explain your objections to the display super-node in a bit more
detail?

Thanks
Daniel
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel




[Index of Archives]     [Linux DRI Users]     [Linux Intel Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux