Thread (269 messages) 269 messages, 18 authors, 2014-11-11

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH 4/4] simplefb: add clock handling code

From: geert@linux-m68k.org (Geert Uytterhoeven)
Date: 2014-08-27 08:37:36
Also in: linux-fbdev

Hi Maxime,

On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Maxime Ripard
[off-list ref] wrote:
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 08:40:57AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 08:40:09PM +0200, Henrik Nordstr?m wrote:
quoted
It is not clear to me where the hardware resources should be listed in
DT, being it a simplefb node or part of the actual hardware device node
properly marked as dynamic boot defaults or something else? It's
somewhere inbetween hardware and virtual device, and somewhat volatile.
As far as simplefb is concerned it is a hardware desription of the
framebuffer, but for a kms driver it's no more than firmware handover of
boottime settings and ceases to exists once the kms driver have
reconfigured the hardware.
Is simplefb something that should be in the device tree distinctly in
the first place - shouldn't it be a subset of the functionality of the
video nodes?  It's the same hardware being driven differently.
Therorically, yes, but that would mean knowing beforehand what the
final binding will look like, even before submitting the driver. Since
the bindings are always reviewed, and most of the time changed
slightly, that wouldn't work very well with the DT as a stable ABI
policy I guess.
If you don't know how the bindings for a device will look like at the time of
writing your DTS, you're always screwed, whether you add a simpefb
node or not.

If you know how the bindings look like, just add the device, with an extra
"linux,simplefb" compatibility value.
If you don't know how the bindings look like, do your utter best in
guessing. Your DTS must be amended later anyway, either because
you guessed wrong[*] (in case you added a node to have simplefb
working), or because you have to add a real device node (in case you
didn't add one for simplefb).

[*] Actually you may have guessed right, in which case it'll continue
    working as-is, and everybody will be happy.
    Whether you want to keep backwards-compatibility in your future driver
    with the "guessed wrong" node is up to you.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert at linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help