Hi Thierry, On 11/13/2013 10:38 PM, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 03:14:22PM +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote: >> Hi Thierry, >> >> I have already sent patch with DSI bus implementation [1]. >> It was posted as the first step of CDF implementation attempt, >> but in fact it do not depend on CDF. >> >> [1] >> http://www.mail-archive.com/dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg45252.html > Seems like that patchset was never merged. I guess probably because it > was posted as part of CDF work. > > Do you have any plans on continuing work on that?If not I could extract > the DSI bus patch from the series, it's largely similar to the patch I > proposed here, and rework it somewhat. I will soon sent new patch with the current version of the bus. It could be a better base to your rework. > I'd very much like to avoid > putting the code in drivers/video, though, since that's considered > obsolete. I have followed convention proposed by Laurent in his DBI bus. It seems to me OK - DSI bus is more related to video than to drm. I know that drivers/video is mostly occupied by FB drivers, but according to Kconfig it is not only for FB. Of course this is only my suggestion. > Furthermore I think if we kept the transfer function proposed > in my patch should make it easier to address Bert's comments from your > posting. I am not sure which part of Barts comment you are addressing. Anyway I also prefer passing struct and returning ssize_t. I am not sure about splitting type and channel but this seems to be a minor detail. Regards Andrzej _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
