On Friday 01 of November 2013 08:55:12 Jingoo Han wrote: > On Friday, November 01, 2013 8:27 AM, Tomasz Figa wrote: > > On Friday 01 of November 2013 08:23:59 Jingoo Han wrote: > > > On Friday, November 01, 2013 8:12 AM, Tomasz Figa wrote: > > > > On Friday 01 of November 2013 08:06:00 Jingoo Han wrote: > > > > > On Thursday, October 31, 2013 7:47 PM, Inki Dae wrote: > > > > > > CCing Jingoo, > > > > > > > > > > > > Is that ok to remove eDP driver from video/exynos? Isn't this > > > > > > driver > > > > > > really used by Linux framebuffer driver, s3c-fb.c? > > > > > > > > > > +cc Tomi Valkeinen, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD, > > > > > > > > > > linux-fbdev list, linux-samsung-soc list > > > > > > > > > > Yes, it is used by s3c-fb.c. > > > > > > > > > > > Of course, now s3c-fb driver is dead code because this driver > > > > > > doesn't > > > > > > support device tree yet but we would need more reviews and > > > > > > discussions > > > > > > about moving this driver into drm side. Let's watch new rules > > > > > > for > > > > > > device tree bindings of DRM world. So I'd not like to merge > > > > > > this > > > > > > driver yet. > > > > > > > > > > 's3c-fb' driver is still used for other mass products projects. > > > > > Just, device tree support patch is not yet submitted. > > > > > > > > Current in-tree users of s3c-fb drivers are s3c2443, non-DT > > > > s3c64xx > > > > and > > > > all s5p* SoCs. It is not used on Exynos SoCs anymore. > > > > > > Hi Tomasz Figa, > > > > Just Tomasz. ;) > > Hi Tomasz, :-) > > > > Some mass product projects using Exynos5250 and etc, use s3c-fb > > > driver > > > and dp driver. Also, these projects are still using Framebuffer, not > > > DRM. > > > > Well, those are based on vendor trees anyway, so do not really affect > > mainline kernel. > > OK, I see. > > > > > As for Exynos DP driver, what SoCs does it support? If only Exynos > > > > (as > > > > the name suggests) then there is no point in keeping it at > > > > video/exynos and making it a part of Exynos DRM driver seems > > > > reasonable to me. > > > > > > However, when considering only mainline kernel, I have no strong > > > objection. As you know, many Linux kernel based OS projects using > > > Exynos, are using DRM, not Framebuffer. > > > > Generally, fbdev is strongly discouraged in any new systems and DRM is > > the way to go, so I don't think we should ever want to bring s3c-fb > > support back to Exynos platforms. > > Yes, you're right. > Personally, I think that all Exynos platforms should go into DRM, not > FB. > > One more thing, then how about moving Exynos MIPI to DRM side? > Is there any plan on Exynos MIPI? Well, it will eventually have to be moved somewhere else than it is, but I believe this will have to wait for Common Display Framework. This is because the case of MIPI DSI is slightly different from DisplayPort, since it is not an enumerable/auto-configurable interface and requires dedicated panel drivers and static data provided by board designers (in DT for example). Handling of such things in a generic way will be done by CDF. Best regards, Tomasz _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
