Around Thu 30 May 2013 09:23:28 +0200 or thereabout, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
On 08:39 Thu 30 May , Richard Genoud wrote:
quoted
2013/5/29 Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD [off-list ref]:
quoted
On 19:44 Wed 29 May , Richard Genoud wrote:
quoted
2013/5/29 Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD [off-list ref]:
quoted
On 16:36 Wed 29 May , Richard Genoud wrote:
quoted
2013/4/11 Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD [off-list ref]:
<snipp diff>
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ bool lcdcon_pol_negative;
I think lcdcon_pol_negative should be part of pdata, because it really
depends on how the PWM is wired on the board.
maybe but no one mainline use it on any pdata for non-dt boars
so I did not want to expose it
Well, at least, I'm using it :)
(and I guess that Andreas is using it also, otherwise he wouldn't have
introduce it !)
yes but pdata is for non-dt boards, for dt you can keep it in struct
atmel_lcdfb_info and add a property
if non-dt boards want it my answer is I do not care switch to DT
ok (I use a full DT board based on sam9g35)
so I'll add something like
sinfo->lcdcon_pol_negative = of_property_read_bool(display_np,
"atmel,lcdcon-pwm-pulse-low");
in /atmel_lcdfb.c
But I thought the goal of this patch was to separate driver data from
platform specific data, and IMHO, lcdcon_pol_negative is a specificity
of the platform.
You are right but as non one mainline use it as pdata I choose to drop it
and only keep it on the driver as we can still use it for DT
It's a way to force peopoe to switch to DT
FYI AVR32 architecture doesn't support device tree, nor is it likely to do
so. However there are no users of the PWM output from the LCDC block for the
boards in the current kernel, and I doubt new boards will pop.
--
Hans-Christian Egtvedt