Hi,
On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 10:13:46 +0200 Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkeinen@ti.com wrote:
Hi,
On 19/01/2019 20:21, Andreas Kemnade wrote:
This panel has a backlight, so fetch it from devicetree using the as documented in panel-common.txt. It is implemented the same way as in
Extra words above, or maybe some are missing...
oops, This panel has a backlight, so fetch it from devicetree using the properties as documented in panel-common.txt. It is implemented the same way as in panel-dpi.c
panel-dpi.c This ensures the backlight is also disabled when the display is turned off like when doing xset dpms force off.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade andreas@kemnade.info
.../gpu/drm/omapdrm/displays/panel-tpo-td028ttec1.c | 18 +++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/displays/panel-tpo-td028ttec1.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/displays/panel-tpo-td028ttec1.c index 7ddc8c574a61..f326ba9dcf62 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/displays/panel-tpo-td028ttec1.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/displays/panel-tpo-td028ttec1.c @@ -35,6 +35,8 @@ struct panel_drv_data {
struct videomode vm;
- struct backlight_device *backlight;
- struct spi_device *spi_dev;
};
@@ -268,6 +270,8 @@ static int td028ttec1_panel_enable(struct omap_dss_device *dssdev)
r |= jbt_ret_write_0(ddata, JBT_REG_DISPLAY_ON);
- backlight_enable(ddata->backlight);
- dssdev->state = OMAP_DSS_DISPLAY_ACTIVE;
transfer_err: @@ -283,6 +287,8 @@ static void td028ttec1_panel_disable(struct omap_dss_device *dssdev) if (!omapdss_device_is_enabled(dssdev)) return;
backlight_disable(ddata->backlight);
dev_dbg(dssdev->dev, "td028ttec1_panel_disable()\n");
jbt_ret_write_0(ddata, JBT_REG_DISPLAY_OFF);
@@ -321,6 +327,15 @@ static int td028ttec1_panel_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "%s\n", __func__);
- ddata = devm_kzalloc(&spi->dev, sizeof(*ddata), GFP_KERNEL);
- if (ddata == NULL)
return -ENOMEM;- ddata->backlight = devm_of_find_backlight(&spi->dev);
- if (IS_ERR(ddata->backlight))
return PTR_ERR(ddata->backlight);Is there a reason for moving the ddata alloc here, instead of keeping it where it was?
Well, I was just unsure if the spi_setup needs to be undone on error, so I moved things around. But the kzalloc() error check would face the same problem and other error checks further on, too.
So I can rather keep it as is.
I will send a v2.
Regards, Andreas