RE: [PATCH v4 3/3] OMAP: DSS2: OMAPFB: Allow usage of def_vrfb only for omap2,3

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hiremath, Vaibhav
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Guruswamy, Senthilvadivu
> >
> > From: Senthilvadivu Guruswamy <svadivu@xxxxxx>
> >
> > Force def_vrfb to 0 for non omap2, omap3 devices
> >
> 
> Can we reword the commit description to something like,
> 
> "For Non-VRFB devices/platforms (omap2, omap3 family) force it to the DMA
> based rotation."
> 
[Senthil] Yes, taken.
> > Signed-off-by: Senthilvadivu Guruswamy <svadivu@xxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/video/omap2/omapfb/omapfb-main.c |   10 ++++++++++
> >  1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/video/omap2/omapfb/omapfb-main.c
> > b/drivers/video/omap2/omapfb/omapfb-main.c
> > index 4b4506d..0f79db8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/video/omap2/omapfb/omapfb-main.c
> > +++ b/drivers/video/omap2/omapfb/omapfb-main.c
> > @@ -2128,6 +2128,16 @@ static int omapfb_probe(struct platform_device
> > *pdev)
> >  		goto err0;
> >  	}
> >
> > +	/* TODO : Replace cpu check with omap_has_vrfb once HAS_FEATURE
> > +	*	 available for OMAP2 and OMAP3
> > +	*/
> 
> This patch may conflict with Archit HAS_FEATURE patch sets. And if I
> understand correctly it has almost making it to DSS2 tree.
[Senthil] As Archit replied in the other thread, HAS_FEATURE of DSS does not cover VRFB, so this would be dependant on the HAS_FEATURE OMAP once it is developed.

> 
> > +	if (def_vrfb && (!cpu_is_omap24xx()) && (!cpu_is_omap34xx())) {
> [Hiremath, Vaibhav] Any way we are forcing to DMA based rotation, then why
> to check for def_vrfb in the above condition. It can be something
> 
> if (!cpu_is_omap24xx() && !cpu_is_omap34xx()) {
> 	def_vrfb = 0;
> 	...
> }
> 
> Does it make sense to you?
[Senthil] The intention of this check is to warn the user if def_vrfb is given as bootarg by chance on wrong omap devices.  That's why the if condition is framed like this.
If this is considered as an ACK then I could generate v5 with the change in the description alone.

> Thanks,
> Vaibhav
> 
> > +		def_vrfb = 0;
> > +		dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "VRFB is not in this device,"
> > +				"using DMA for rotation\n");
> > +	}
> > +
> > +
> >  	mutex_init(&fbdev->mtx);
> >
> >  	fbdev->dev = &pdev->dev;
> > --
> > 1.6.3.3

--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Arm (vger)]     [ARM Kernel]     [ARM MSM]     [Linux Tegra]     [Linux WPAN Networking]     [Linux Wireless Networking]     [Maemo Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux