Re: [PATCH V7 03/12] drm/bridge: Add helper functions for drm_bridge

From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
To: Ajay kumar <ajaynumb@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jingoo Han <jg1.han@samsung.com>,
	dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Pannaga Bhushan Reddy Patel <bhushan.r@samsung.com>,
	Prashanth G <prashanth.g@samsung.com>,
	Ajay Kumar <ajaykumar.rs@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 03/12] drm/bridge: Add helper functions for drm_bridge
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 16:05:34 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141028150532.GF17770@ulmo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEC9eQNqDNS0HgCSCOkVBYzSypHCt+aMxYZaX1vmTr8SKn2cbA@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1490 bytes --]

On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 08:16:44PM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Thierry Reding
> <thierry.reding@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 03:19:36PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Ajay kumar <ajaynumb@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > [...]
> >> >> Hm, if you do this can you pls also update drm_panel accordingly? It
> >> >> shouldn't be a lot of fuzz and would make things around drm+dt more
> >> >> consistent.
> >> > Are you talking about using struct device_node instead of struct device?
> >> > I guess you have misplaced the comment under the wrong section!
> >>
> >> Yeah, that should have been one up ;-)
> >
> > Like I said earlier, I don't think dropping struct device * in favour of
> > struct device_node * is a good idea.
> I am not sure about drm_panel.
> But, I am not really doing anything with the struct device pointer in
> case of bridge.
> So, just wondering if it is really needed?

I think it's useful to have it just to send the right message. DRM panel
and DRM bridge aren't specific to device tree. They are completely
generic and can work with any type of device, whether it was
instantiated from the device tree or some other infrastructure. Dropping
struct device * will make it effectively useless on anything but DT. I
don't think we should strive for that, even if only DT-enabled platforms
currently use them.

Thierry

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 159 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel