Re: [PATCH 3/4] OMAPDSS: panel-sharp-ls037v7dw01: add device tree support

[Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1699 bytes --]

On 16/05/14 21:01, Tony Lindgren wrote:

>> IMHO appending -omap-dss to a random device is an even bigger hack,
>> since its adding lots of bloat to the API. Let's assume there is
>> another OS using DT for ARM, but has no proper API for SPI
>> controllers and it introduces your hack to SPI devices. That would
>> mean each SPI device has -omap-spi appended (or -exynos-spi,
>> -foo-spi, ...). At least I would blame them for creating a huge
>> unmaintainable mess.
> 
> I think you're misunderstanding. I do not want the naming to
> be Linux specific. The naming should naturally be as hardware
> specific as possible. In this case something like:
> 
> compatible = "sharp,ls037v7dw01-dss", "sharp,ls037v7dw01";
> 
> Or we should probably use:
> 
> compatible = "sharp,ls037v7dw01-dpi", "sharp,ls037v7dw01";
> 
> As dpi here reflects the hardware it's connected to. The dss
> is probably a Linux name.

Well, "dss" or "omapdss" is as much a hardware term as "dpi". And "dpi"
wouldn't really be a good extension, as what we want is an omapdss
driver specific compatible string. So I think "-omapdss" is the best
extension if that method is used.

But I don't think that's really the point. The point is that the panel's
compatible string should be "sharp,ls037v7dw01", nothing else.

All the variations of "sharp,ls037v7dw01-dss" are not correct, and are
only made for Linux SW reasons. So I would say they are Linux specific
SW names, even if the words themselves are also HW terms.

> Not use what you're after with the SPI example though, but sounds
> like that's something different.

I think Sebastien's example is just like the issue here.

 Tomi



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]