On Thursday 03 December 2015 10:02:02 Rob Clark wrote: > On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 4:59 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Monday 27 July 2015 11:46:57 Archit Taneja wrote: > >> ADV7511 is represented as an i2c drm slave encoder device. ADV7533, on > >> the other hand, is going be a normal i2c client device creating bridge > >> and connector entities. > > > > Please, no. It's really time to stop piling hacks and fix the problem > > properly. There's no reason to have separate APIs for I2C slave encoders > > and DRM bridges. Those two APIs need to be merged, and then you'll find > > it much easier to implement ADV7533 support. > > btw, what is the status here? I'd kind of lost track of the > discussion, but I'm getting impatient that it is somehow taking > ridiculously long to get adv7533 support merged. (It's good thing the > x86/desktop folks don't bikeshed so much.. I'd hate to wait a year > for my new laptop to be supported..) I'd hardly call the overall architecture on which drivers rely a bikeshed (and maybe if x86/desktop folks cared more about embedded there would be more willingness to make the framework evolve in an embedded-friendly way). > Anyways, if needed, just copy/paste the adv7511/7533 code into a > separate bridge-only driver, and we'll use that. Once the > i2c-slave-encoder users for adv7511 are converted over, we can delete > the original slave encoder driver. That seems like a sane transition > plan to a bridge-only world. It's a very sane way to make sure nobody will do the work and keep two copies of the same code for a long time, yes. The path forward is pretty clear, the issue is to find someone who can do the work. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
