Hello. Below is my comments Thank you. > -----Original Message----- > From: Sergei Shtylyov [mailto:sshtylyov@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 1:02 AM > To: Inki Dae > Cc: linux-fbdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > kyungmin.park@xxxxxxxxxxx; kgene.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx; akpm@linux- > foundation.org; lethal@xxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] FB: added a structure for CPU interface to > linux/fb.h > > Hello. > > Inki Dae wrote: > > > RGB or CPU interfaces could be used as display mode but framebuffer > > framework doesn't consider CPU interface so I added this structure > > because fb_cpumode structure could be used commonly. > > > Signed-off-by: Inki Dae <inki.dae@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > include/linux/fb.h | 12 ++++++++++++ > > 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > diff --git a/include/linux/fb.h b/include/linux/fb.h > > index 7fca3dc..9b9842c 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/fb.h > > +++ b/include/linux/fb.h > > @@ -1147,6 +1147,18 @@ struct fb_videomode { > > u32 flag; > > }; > > > > +struct fb_cpumode { > > + const char *name; /* optional */ > > + u32 refresh; /* optional */ > > + u32 xres; > > + u32 yres; > > I think that those two fields should happily fit into 'u16' type. > I agree to your opinion, but I just followed existing struct fb_videomode. Do you or everybody have any idea for whether changing typef('u32' -> 'u16') or not? if it is more better to modify type then I will correct it. > > + u32 pixclock; > > + u32 cs_setup; > > + u32 wr_setup; > > + u32 wr_act; > > + u32 wr_hold; > > Suspecting the same about the above 4 fields... > Same. > WBR, Sergei -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fbdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
