RE: [PATCH v7 2/2] video: backlight: support s6e8ax0 panel driver based on MIPI DSI
From: Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com>
Date: 2012-01-27 02:07:44
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel
Hi, Tomi. Below is my comments.
-----Original Message----- From: Tomi Valkeinen [mailto:tomi.valkeinen@ti.com] Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 12:53 AM To: Donghwa Lee Cc: linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Florian Tobias Schandinat; Andrew Morton; rpurdie@linux.intel.com; inki.dae@samsung.com; kyungmin.park@samsung.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] video: backlight: support s6e8ax0 panel driver based on MIPI DSI Hi, On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 14:28 +0900, Donghwa Lee wrote:quoted
This patch is amoled panel driver based MIPI DSI interface. S6E8AX0 means it may includes many other ldi controllers, for example, S6E8AA0, S6E8AB0, and so on. This patch can be modified depending on each panel properites. For example, second parameter of panel condition register can be changed depending on ldi controller or amoled type. Changes since v6: - change data type from const to static const Signed-off-by: Donghwa Lee <redacted> Signed-off-by: Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@samsung.com> --- drivers/video/backlight/Kconfig | 7 + drivers/video/backlight/Makefile | 1 + drivers/video/backlight/s6e8ax0.c | 898+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++quoted
drivers/video/backlight/s6e8ax0.h | 21 + 4 files changed, 927 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/video/backlight/s6e8ax0.c create mode 100644 drivers/video/backlight/s6e8ax0.hWhy is this in backlight directory? It's a panel driver, not a backlight driver.
Yes, right. this backlight driver is specific to our mipi dsi driver because this uses the interface of mipi dsi driver to send some commands to real lcd panel.
And the driver is s5p specific, wouldn't a directory like drivers/video/s5p/, where both the s5p DSI driver from the previous patch and this panel driver could be?
Ok, we will create new directory, "exynos" instead of "s5p" because our SoC chip doesn't use such prefix(s5p, and s3c) anymore. and also as you mentioned, we should working on a common DSI framework. do you have any plan for this? Thanks, Inki Dae.
Tomi