[PATCH 0/5] at91: atmel_lcdfb: regression fixes and cpu_is removal

On 02/10/2013 07:45 PM, Johan Hovold :

On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 1:47 AM, Olof Johansson [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 05:35:13PM +0100, Nicolas Ferre wrote:

quoted

These patches fix a regression in 16-bpp support for older SOCs which
use IBGR:555 rather than BGR:565 pixel layout. Use SOC-type to
determine if the controller uses the intensity-bit and restore the
old layout in that case.

The last patch is a removal of uses of cpu_is_xxxx() macros in
atmel_lcdfb with a platform-device-id table and static
configurations.


Patches from Johan Hovold taken from: "[PATCH 0/3] atmel_lcdfb: fix
16-bpp regression" and "[PATCH v2 0/3] ARM: at91/avr32/atmel_lcdfb:
remove cpu_is macros" patch series to form a clean patch series with
my signature.

Arnd, Olof, as it seems that old fbdev drivers are not so much
reviewed those days, can we take the decision to queue this material
through arm-soc with other AT91 drivers updates?

It would be beneficial to get an ack from Florian. Was he involved in
the review of the code that regressed 16-bpp support in the first
place? When was the regression introduced?

In v3.4 by commit 787f9fd2328 ("atmel_lcdfb: support 16bit BGR:565 mode,
remove unsupported 15bit modes").

Arnd, Olof,

Please tell me if I can do something to ease the adoption of these
patches during 3.9-rc timeframe (I can rebase it on top of 3.9-rc1 to
avoid any conflict: the file board-neocore926.c was removed during the
merge window).
Johan has written the series a long time ago and we still do not have it
in mainline.

If the option to ask Andrew is better in your opinion, please tell me.

Best regards,
-- 
Nicolas Ferre