On 10/12/2015 08:49 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 12.10.2015 09:37, Yakir Yang wrote:
Hi Krzysztof,
On 10/10/2015 11:46 PM, Yakir Yang wrote:
Both hsync/vsync polarity and interlace mode can be parsed from
drm display mode, and dynamic_range and ycbcr_coeff can be judge
by the video code.
But presumably Exynos still relies on the DT properties, so take
good use of mode_fixup() in to achieve the compatibility hacks.
Signed-off-by: Yakir Yang <ykk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Changes in v6: None
+ of_property_read_u32(dp_node, "hsync-active-high",
+ &video->h_sync_polarity);
+ of_property_read_u32(dp_node, "vsync-active-high",
+ &video->v_sync_polarity);
+ of_property_read_u32(dp_node, "interlaced",
+ &video->interlaced);
+}
Sorry, forget to fix your previous comment here, would
remember to fix it to v7 version, wish v6 would collect
more comment/reviewed/ack. :)
Right.
You can send a v7 of only this patch.
In the same time I would prefer not to chain-reply next version of
entire patchset to cover letter of previous version. It confuses me
because v6 appears UNDER v4 so I can't really find v6. I see v4 at the
top of my email list.
Okay, I wish this chain-reply would make people easy to find the
previous comments, but actually it is little mess now. I would give
up this way to send patchset :)
In the same time the patchset is quite big. Put the latest version (with
this issue above fixed!) on some repo and link it in cover letter.
Yeah, it's quite big now, I would like to back the patchset to previous
format, like:
---> [PATCH v6 00/17] Cover letter
|----> [PATCH v6 01/17]
|----> [PATCH ......]
|----> [PATCH v6 05/17]
|----> [PATCH v7 05/17]
|----> [PATCH ......]
|----> [PATCH v6 17/17]
Is it right, and can resend the v6 to fix this chain-reply issue with
RESEND flag ([PATCH RESEND v6 ...]) ?
---> [PATCH RESEND v6 00/17] Cover letter
|----> [PATCH RESEND v6 01/17]
|----> [PATCH ......]
|----> [PATCH RESEND v6 05/17]
|----> [PATCH v7 05/17]
|----> [PATCH ......]
|----> [PATCH RESEND v6 17/17]
Thanks :-)
- Yakir
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Best regards,
- Yakir
Changes in v5:
- Switch video timing type to "u32", so driver could use
"of_property_read_u32"
to get the backword timing values. Krzysztof suggest me that driver
could use
the "of_property_read_bool" to get backword timing values, but that
interfacs
would modify the original drm_display_mode timing directly (whether
those
properties exists or not).
Changes in v4:
- Provide backword compatibility with samsung. (Krzysztof)
Changes in v3:
- Dynamic parse video timing info from struct drm_display_mode and
struct drm_display_info. (Thierry)
Changes in v2: None
--
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
