Hi Thierry, On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 02:13:54AM +0530, Ajay Kumar wrote: > [...] >> Also, remove the drm_connector implementation from ptn3460, >> since the same is implemented using panel_binder. > > I think that's a step backwards. In fact I think the panel-bridge binder > driver shouldn't be needed at all. At least not for now. We have a very > limited number of bridge drivers, so it shouldn't hurt at this stage to > implement the connector instantiation within each driver. Once we have > more bridge drivers, and therefore a better understanding of what they > need, we can always add something like the panel-binder (though I think > it should be library code, similar to the drm_encoder_helper_add() API, > rather than this kind of self-contained object). panel_binder was needed to wrap around panel as a bridge, and this was in turn needed because people wanted to represent a bridge+panel combo as a chain of bridges. So, if we choose to drop panel_binder, we choose to drop the idea of chaining the bridges, and end up calling drm_panel functions directly from individual bridges. And, the bridge will implement the connector functions as you suggested. I am okay with this, if Daniel/Rob don't have an issue with this. Ajay _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
