Hi Laurent,
Thank you for sharing your idea.
On 04/29/2014 12:05 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Hi YoungJun,
On Tuesday 22 April 2014 10:24:39 YoungJun Cho wrote:
On 04/22/2014 08:00 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Hi YoungJun,
Thank you for the patch.
On Monday 21 April 2014 21:28:37 YoungJun Cho wrote:
This patch adds MIPI-DSI command mode based S6E3FA0 AMOLED LCD Panel
driver.
Changelog v2:
- Declares delay, size properties in probe routine instead of DT
Changelog v3:
- Moves CPU timings relevant properties from FIMD DT
(commented by Laurent Pinchart, Andrzej Hajda)
Signed-off-by: YoungJun Cho <yj44.cho@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Inki Dae <inki.dae@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/panel/Kconfig | 7 +
drivers/gpu/drm/panel/Makefile | 1 +
drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-s6e3fa0.c | 569 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 577 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-s6e3fa0.c
[snip]
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-s6e3fa0.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-s6e3fa0.c new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1282678
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-s6e3fa0.c
@@ -0,0 +1,569 @@
[snip]
+static int s6e3fa0_get_modes(struct drm_panel *panel)
+{
+ struct drm_connector *connector = panel->connector;
+ struct s6e3fa0 *ctx = panel_to_s6e3fa0(panel);
+ struct drm_display_mode *mode;
+
+ mode = drm_mode_create(connector->dev);
+ if (!mode) {
+ DRM_ERROR("failed to create a new display mode\n");
+ return 0;
+ }
+
+ drm_display_mode_from_videomode(&ctx->vm, mode);
+ mode->width_mm = ctx->width_mm;
+ mode->height_mm = ctx->height_mm;
+ connector->display_info.width_mm = mode->width_mm;
+ connector->display_info.height_mm = mode->height_mm;
+
+ mode->type = DRM_MODE_TYPE_DRIVER | DRM_MODE_TYPE_PREFERRED;
+ mode->private = (void *)&ctx->cpu_timings;
Wouldn't it make sense to create a new get_interface_params (or similar)
operation for drm_panel to query interface configuration parameters
instead of shoving it in the mode private field ?
You mean "new get_interface_params operation" is different from
get_modes() ?
Till now, struct drm_display_mode and most of mode relevant APIs are
only for video interface.
And CPU interface also needs video mode configurations.
I have a plan to implement the CPU interface relevant APIs like video
mode ones, but I think they should be used under current DRM mode APIs
like fill_modes, get_modes and so on.
So after that implementation, this private field will be replaced by
new ones.
Could you explain it in more detail?
The idea is that the interface parameters (RD/WR signals timings in this case,
but this could also include MIPI DSI lane configuration or any other kind of
physical interface parameters) are distinct from the video modes.
Yes. The RD/WR signals timings are distinct from the video modes,
but in my opinion, others are covered by video mode already.
Do you see a need to tie tie interface parameters with drm_display_mode ? Can
they be mode-specific ? In any case I'd like not to use the private field of
drm_display_mode. If we need to tie both information together then it should
be done in a standard way.
I think this cpu-mode-timings is in struct drm_display_mode
(NOT by *private) and requires drm_display_mode_from_cpumode()
because the drm_display_mode_from_videomode() covers only video mode.
I'll try implement it as soon as possible.
Thank you,
Best regards YJ.
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
