On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Ajay kumar <ajaynumb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > We can call panel_enable/disable at the right point. Even the bridge chips > expect the same. So, I am not ok with combining the bridge and panel and > calling the fxn pointers from crtc_helpers. > So, either we leave it the way it is in this patch (call drm_panel > functions at right points) or > we don't use drm_panel to control the panel sequence and instead use few DT > properties and regulators, inside the bridge chip driver. That wasn't really suggested, but instead the idea was to provide a default drm_bridge which wraps the drm_panel so that you could more easily chain them up. Also I'm not really happy that the bridge callbacks have been added to the drm helpers (I'd prefer if driver callbacks would bear that responsibility). But you can always create your own drm_bridge integration. In any case your concern that drivers need to control when certain callbacks are called is shared by everyone here afaics. And I also don't see any issues with Rob's proposal in this regard. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch -- 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
 |