On 10/29/2014 08:58 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 04:05:34PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 08:16:44PM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Thierry Reding >>> <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 03:19:36PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Ajay kumar <ajaynumb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> [...] >>>>>>> Hm, if you do this can you pls also update drm_panel accordingly? It >>>>>>> shouldn't be a lot of fuzz and would make things around drm+dt more >>>>>>> consistent. >>>>>> Are you talking about using struct device_node instead of struct device? >>>>>> I guess you have misplaced the comment under the wrong section! >>>>> >>>>> Yeah, that should have been one up ;-) >>>> >>>> Like I said earlier, I don't think dropping struct device * in favour of >>>> struct device_node * is a good idea. >>> I am not sure about drm_panel. >>> But, I am not really doing anything with the struct device pointer in >>> case of bridge. >>> So, just wondering if it is really needed? >> >> I think it's useful to have it just to send the right message. DRM panel >> and DRM bridge aren't specific to device tree. They are completely >> generic and can work with any type of device, whether it was >> instantiated from the device tree or some other infrastructure. Dropping >> struct device * will make it effectively useless on anything but DT. I >> don't think we should strive for that, even if only DT-enabled platforms >> currently use them. > > See my other reply, but I now think we should put neither into drm > structures. This "find me the driver structures for this device" problem > looks really generic, and it has nothing to do with the drm structures and > concepts like bridges/panels at all. It shouldn't be in there at all. > > Adding it looks very much like reintroducing the drm midlayer that we just > finally made obsolete, just not at the top-level (struct drm_device) but > at a bunch of leaf nodes. I expect all the same issues though. And I'm > definitely not looking to de-midlayer more stuff that we're just adding. > > Imo this should be solved as a separate helper thing, maybe in the driver > core akin to the component helpers from Russell. > -Daniel > As I understand you want something generic to look for panels, bridges, whatever and, like components, it should allow to safe hot plug/unplug. I have proposed such thing few months ago [1]. Have you looked at it? [1]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/30/345 Regards Andrzej -- 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
 |