On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 11:53 +0100, ext Grazvydas Ignotas wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 7:41 PM, TAO HU <tghk48@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > One idea as below
> >
> > struct spi_dss_device {
> > struct omap_dss_device dss_dev;
> > struct spi_dss_dev_priv * spi_data;
> > } spi_dss_dev;
>
> Hm, omap_dss_register_device() takes omap_dss_driver, not
> omap_dss_device. Anyway that wouldn't work if there were 2 instances
> of same panel in one system I guess, as 2 different spi_data instances
> would probe, when there is only one omap_dss_driver.
>
> Instead I'm thinking to link omap_dss_device with spi in board file
> itself by (ab)using platform_data:
>
> static struct omap_dss_device pandora_lcd_device = {
> ...
> };
>
> struct spi_board_info pandora_spi_board_info = {
> .bus_num = 1,
> ...
> .platform_data = pandora_lcd_device,
> };
>
> Then in panel driver:
>
> int spi_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> {
> struct omap_dss_device *dssdev = spi->dev.platform_data;
> dev_set_drvdata(&dssdev->dev, spi);
> }
>
> static int lcd_probe(struct omap_dss_device *dssdev)
> {
> struct spi_device *spi = dev_get_drvdata(&dssdev->dev);
> }
>
> Tomi, does that look reasonable to you?
Yes, the linking has to be done inside the board file somehow. I need to
try this at some point with N900's panel driver, but I think it looks
good.
I think you could also link it other way around, store the
spi_board_info inside the dss_device, but I don't immediately see that
this way is better than the other.
Tomi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
