W dniu 04.05.2015 o 22:15, Andrzej Hajda pisze:
Hi,
On 05/04/2015 02:43 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
2015-05-04 20:34 GMT+09:00 Daniel Stone daniel@fooishbar.org:
Hi,
On 4 May 2015 at 08:43, Inki Dae inki.dae@samsung.com wrote:
On 2015년 05월 02일 13:08, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Selecting CONFIG_FB_S3C disables CONFIG_DRM_EXYNOS_FIMD leading to build error:
No, eDP has no any dependency of FIMD but DECON. Just add dependency code like below,
config DRM_EXYNOS7_DECON bool "Exynos DRM DECON"
depends on DRM_EXYNOS
depends on DRM_EXYNOS && !FB_S3CActually my commit message was not detailed enough. The FB_S3C here won't solve the issue because you may: 1, disable FIMD and FB_S3C, 2, enabke DECON and DP, and it won't compile.
Currently the FIMD must be enabled if DRM_EXYNOS_DP is enabled.
But it does clearly and explicitly call fimd_dp_clock_enable from exynos_dp_powero{n,ff}. So the dependency you're proposing seems backwards: it's not an expression of the requirements of the current code (that FIMD DP code be available, i.e. CONFIG_DRM_EXYNOS_FIMD is selected), but an indirect expression of another dependency (CONFIG_FB_S3C disables CONFIG_DRM_EXYNOS_FIMD, so disable CONFIG_FB_S3C).
Additionally, as the call comes from exynos_dp_core.c, which is built by CONFIG_DRM_EXYNOS_DP (an explicitly user-selectable option), why shouldn't the dependency be there? Ah, because the dependency on DP is for (DECON || FIMD), but as DECON doesn't provide fimd_dp_clock_enable(), it doesn't seem like it would compile if you selected DECON and not FIMD.
So, for me, the cleanest solution would be config DRM_EXYNOS_DP gains a hard dependency on DRM_EXYNOS_FIMD, at least until it can be fixed to compile without FIMD.
Right, you correctly pointed current dependencies. Still it looks little hacky because EXYNOS_DP may work with FIMD or DECON.
Are you sure? I have not seen any chipset having DECON and DP. In all chipsets known to me DP is always accompanied by FIMD. I guess it can change in the future, but for now hard dependency on FIMD seems to be OK
- it just reflects hardware design.
Of course this is just my humble opinion :)
OK, so my next question would be: does DECON requires similar clock handling like FIMD on certain SoCs? In other words - does something like fimd_dp_clock_enable() have any sense in context of DECON?
Best regards, Krzysztof