On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 09:43:27AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 06:48:45AM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 12:11:18PM +0200, Denis Carikli wrote:
> > > +
> > > /*
> > > * Bitfield of Display Interface signal polarities.
> > > */
> > > @@ -37,7 +43,7 @@ struct ipu_di_signal_cfg {
> > > unsigned clksel_en:1;
> > > unsigned clkidle_en:1;
> > > unsigned data_pol:1; /* true = inverted */
> > > - unsigned clk_pol:1; /* true = rising edge */
> > > + unsigned clk_pol:1;
> > > unsigned enable_pol:1;
> > > unsigned Hsync_pol:1; /* true = active high */
> > > unsigned Vsync_pol:1;
> >
> > ...can we rename the flags to more meaningful names instead?
> >
> > unsigned clk_pol_rising_edge:1;
> > unsigned enable_pol_high:1;
> > unsigned hsync_active_high:1;
> > unsigned vsync_active_high:1;
>
> Now look at patch 7, where these become tri-state:
> - don't change
> - rising edge/active high
> - falling edge/active low
>
> So your suggestion is not a good idea.
Hm, you're right.
Still I think we should add a prefix to make the context of the flags
clear.
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
