Hi Tomasz,
2014-02-08 11:48 GMT+09:00 Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@xxxxxxxxx>:
> On 06.02.2014 20:54, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Sean Paul <seanpaul@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> This patchset refactors parts of the exynos driver to move it closer to a
>>> proper
>>> drm driver (rather than just implementing a drm layer on top of the
>>> hardware
>>> drivers). The hope is to get to a point where the dp/hdmi drivers can
>>> implement
>>> drm_connector/drm_encoder directly, and fimd/mixer can directly implement
>>> drm_crtc.
>>>
>>> The notable changes in this set:
>>> - drm_encoder funcs no longer route through the crtc
>>> - DP driver has been moved from video into the drm driver
>>> - fimd no longer implements encoder callbacks
>>> - exynos_drm_hdmi is removed in favor of generic manager/display
>>> handling
>>>
>>> At a glance, differences between v1 and v2:
>>> - Passing manager/display in callbacks instead of ctx
>>> - Tacked on some dpms patches on the end to handle
>>> suspend/resume
>>> through the dpms path
>>>
>>> At a glance, differences between v2 and v3:
>>> - Fixed vidi issues
>>> - Moved exynos_drm_hdmi.c removal to the right place
>>> - Added the exynos_drm_connector removal patches on the end
>>>
>>> At a glance, differences between v3 and v4:
>>> - Rebased on top of exynos-drm-next
>>> - Addressed review comments, no major functional changes
>>>
>>> Sean
>>
>>
>> Even if there is room for even more cleanups and refactorings on top
>> of this, it's good enough as a base and keeping it out of tree is
>> hurting productivity and usefulness for everybody. Let's get this
>> merged for 3.15 so that we can make progress with the rest of the
>> platform!
>
>
> I wouldn't be overly excited about merging this series yet...
>
> If I have applied it correctly (and I believe so, as reading the code tells
> me the same), it introduces a regression due to removal of support of
> standard parallel displays from FIMD driver.
>
> I had mentioned this in my review comments for previous version, but
> apparently I got ignored. Please fix this.
>
Right, and also some my comments. Sean should have commented his
opinions even if our comments aren't reasonable to him.
I sent a email about the progress of this refactoring patch series to
Sean and Olof personally because there was no any follow-up action for
about two months since v3 had been posted, and I found out that Sean
was busy with other works.
And there are no any his comments until now so I'd like to believe
Sean would still be busy. So I already started to clean up and enhance
Exynos drm framework using the component framework for super device
posted by Russell like below,
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=2a41e6070dd7ef539d0f3b1652b4839d04378e11
Last month, Russell had posted this framework, and it has been merged
to mainline. This provides a generic way to gather up the individual
sub devices together using super node?? (not sure if it's a proper
expression) of device tree.
With this, we could remove existing exynos_drm_core.c and I guess we
could also resolve your concern about dt broken this time.
The patch series I'm preparing will go to on top of Sean's refactoring
patch series.
Thanks,
Inki Dae
> Best regards,
> Tomasz
>
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
