On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Jean-Francois Moine moinejf@free.fr wrote:
On Sat, 18 May 2013 14:23:19 -0400 Rob Clark robdclark@gmail.com wrote:
These parameters should not be there. It seems to me that the DT is the right place.
You might not want to directly have a hard DT dependency in tda998x, as the encoder could be used on non-DT platforms. Although a DT to encoder-params helper might be a nice idea for platforms which do have DT.
If I correctly understand:
Russell does not use any DT, so his drm driver should be declared in some cubox-setup code in mach-dove/
this code should also declare the tda998x
the drm driver contains/passes parameters to the tda998x
As the connection Dove LCD <-> tda998x is Cubox specific, the question is: why are'nt the tda998x parameters in the cubox-setup code?
ok, maybe I am misunderstanding you. I think the parameters should be filled in by the board file on a non-DT setup. But the part in drivers/gpu/drm/i2c should not pull them directly out of DT, or should have an arrangement like
#ifdef CONFIG_OF .. pull params out of DT .. #else .. use params passed in from via params struct, which is populated in board file .. #endif
to accommodate non-DT builds. (Although I think just having a helper to populate 'struct tda998x_encoder_params' from DT seems cleaner.)
BR, -R
-- Ken ar c'hentañ | ** Breizh ha Linux atav! ** Jef | http://moinejf.free.fr/