2013/3/7 김승우 <sw0312.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>: > > > On 2013년 03월 04일 23:05, Rahul Sharma wrote: >> Thanks Sean, >> >> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Sean Paul <seanpaul@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 8:22 AM, Rahul Sharma <rahul.sharma@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> Right now hdmiphy operations and configs are kept inside hdmi driver. hdmiphy related >>>> code is tightly coupled with hdmi ip driver. Physicaly they are different devices and >>> >>> s/Physicaly/Physically/ >>> >>>> should be instantiated independently. >>>> >>>> In terms of versions/mapping/configurations Hdmi and hdmiphy are independent of each >>>> other. It is preferred to isolate them and maintained independently. >>>> >>>> This implementations is tested for: >>>> 1) Resolutions supported by exynos4 and 5 hdmi. >>>> 2) Runtime PM and S2R scenarions for exynos5. >>>> >>> >>> I don't like the idea of spawning off yet another driver in here. It >>> adds more globals, more suspend/resume ordering issues, and more >>> implicit dependencies. I understand, however, that this is the Chosen >>> Way for the exynos driver, so I will save my rant. >>> >> >> I agree to it. splitting phy to a new driver will complicate the power related >> scenarios. But in upcoming SoC,s, Phy is changing considerably in terms of >> config values, mapping (i2c/platform bus) etc. Handling this diversity >> inside hdmi driver is complicating it with unrelated changes. > > Basically, I agree with the idea to split hdmiphy from hdmi. And it > seems that already existing hdmiphy i2c device is just reused and > hdmiphy_power_on is reorganized to hdmiphy dpms operation: even calling > flow of power operations is reordered. > > But I'm not sure exynos_hdmiphy_driver_register() really need to be > called from exynos_drm_init() of exynos_drm_drv.c. IMO, it is enough to > call exynos_hdmiphy_driver_register() from hdmi_probe() because hdmiphy > is only used from hdmi. > I agree with Seung-Woo. The hdmiphy is just one part of HDMI subsystem. Thanks, Inki Dae > Thanks and Regards, > - Seung-Woo Kim > >> >> I have tested this RFC for Runtime PM / S2R. But if we see any major roadblock >> we should re-factor this by explicitly calling power related callbacks >> of mixer, phy, >> hdmi drivers in a required order. We can call them from exynos-drm-hdmi plf >> device. AFAIR something like this is already in place in chrome-kernel. >> >>> I've made some comments below. >>> >>>> This patch is dependent on >>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg34733.html >>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg34861.html >>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg34862.html >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Rahul Sharma <rahul.sharma@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> It is based on exynos-drm-next-todo branch at >>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/daeinki/drm-exynos.git >>>> >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c | 8 + >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.h | 6 + >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_hdmi.c | 58 ++- >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_hdmi.h | 11 + >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_hdmi.c | 375 ++------------------ >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_hdmi.h | 1 - >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_hdmiphy.c | 586 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/regs-hdmiphy.h | 61 ++++ >>>> 8 files changed, 738 insertions(+), 368 deletions(-) >>>> create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/regs-hdmiphy.h >>>> > > <snip> > > -- > Seung-Woo Kim > Samsung Software R&D Center > -- > > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |