Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 9:00 PM Tejas Vipin <tejasvipin76@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> @@ -418,79 +398,42 @@ static const struct ltk050h3146w_desc ltk050h3146w_data = {
> MIPI_DSI_MODE_LPM | MIPI_DSI_MODE_NO_EOT_PACKET,
> };
>
> -static int ltk050h3146w_a2_select_page(struct ltk050h3146w *ctx, int page)
> +static void ltk050h3146w_a2_select_page(struct mipi_dsi_multi_context *dsi_ctx, int page)
> {
> - struct mipi_dsi_device *dsi = to_mipi_dsi_device(ctx->dev);
> - u8 d[3] = { 0x98, 0x81, page };
> + u8 d[4] = { 0xff, 0x98, 0x81, page };
>
> - return mipi_dsi_dcs_write(dsi, 0xff, d, ARRAY_SIZE(d));
> + mipi_dsi_dcs_write_buffer_multi(dsi_ctx, d, ARRAY_SIZE(d));
FWIW: the above might be slightly better as:
mipi_dsi_dcs_write_seq_multi(dsi_ctx, 0xff, 0x98, 0x81, page);
That would make it more documenting that the 0xff is the "cmd", has
fewer lines of code, and also gets the array marked as "static const"
which might make the compiler slightly more efficient. ;-)
Not really a huge deal, though.
Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
