Hi,
On Thu, 2010-08-26 at 14:43 +0200, ext Archit Taneja wrote:
> Add dss_features.c and dss_features.h for the dss_features framework
>
> Signed-off-by: Archit Taneja <archit@xxxxxx>
Would a more static approach be cleaner? I mean something like this
(pseudo code):
static struct omap_dss_features omap3_dss_features = {
/* array of register definitions */
.registers = {
{
.register = FIRHINC,
.high = 12,
.low = 0,
},
{
.register = FIRVINC,
.high = 28,
.low = 16,
},
...
},
/* array of feature ids */
.features = {
GLOBAL_ALPHA,
GLOBAL_ALPHA_VIDEO1,
...
},
};
And then the code would select the omapX_dss_features struct to use
depending on the omap version.
Also, the feature/register defines should have some prefix, and perhaps
they could be inside an enum?
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
