Re: [PATCH 3/6] OMAPDSS: DSI: Maintain copy of video mode timings in driver data

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

 



On Thu, 2012-08-16 at 17:27 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote:
> On Thursday 16 August 2012 05:01 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-08-16 at 13:06 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote:
> >> The DSI driver currently relies on the omap_dss_device struct to receive the
> >> video mode timings requested by the panel driver. This makes the DSI interface
> >> driver dependent on the omap_dss_device struct.
> >>
> >> Make the DSI driver data maintain it's own video mode timings field. The panel
> >> driver is expected to call omapdss_dsi_set_videomode_timings() to configure the
> >> video mode timings before the interface is enabled. The function takes in a
> >> void pointer rather than a pointer to omap_dss_dsi_videomode_timings struct.
> >> This is because this function will finally be an output op shared across
> >> different outputs to set custom or private timings.
> >
> > I don't think the function should take a void * in any case. If we want
> > to share the function, it should take a struct that perhaps contains an
> > union of rfbi and dsi timings.
> >
> > But I'm not sure if there's any benefit for that...
> >
> > So do you see us having just one set_timings, which would take either
> > the normal video timings, rfbi timings or dsi timings?
> 
> I thought of having 2 timing ops, one is a standard "modeline like" 
> set_timings(), and the other a vague-ish set_custom_timings(). For 
> us(OMAP), we need to use it for DSI videomode and RFBI, we may reduce 
> that to only RFBI later if we calculate for DSI timings automatically.
> 
> For these extra timings to be consistent across SoCs, we would need to 
> align to get a common struct of some sort, which could then have unions 
> as you said. For now, I thought having a void pointer might suffice.

I would only use void * when it's a must, i.e. when really anything can
be passed as a parameter. In our case, I think having just two separate
functions is best.

I think the timings in videomode and rfbi structs should be SoC
independent even now, at least more or less. But you're right, it should
be verified. And any names in the structs should be according to DBI or
DSI spec, not OMAP. But this is for later.

 Tomi

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


[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