From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: moinejf@free.fr (Jean-Francois Moine) Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2014 21:07:54 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v5 00/23] In-Reply-To: <20140202191505.GK26684@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20140202124358.GD26684@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20140202190606.6fa193ce@armhf> <20140202182349.GJ26684@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20140202195400.073f4eb4@armhf> <20140202191505.GK26684@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <20140202210754.307b41e8@armhf> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sun, 2 Feb 2014 19:15:05 +0000 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > In which case, it may be better to reorder the remaining patches such > that the DT changes are at the very end - which means we can still > benefit from the rest of the patches if the DT solution remains an > open question. > > We do have another option now that my generic component support is in > mainline (merged during this window), which should result in a much > cleaner solution. If we convert TDA998x to a component, armada DRM > to a component master (and same for other tda998x users) then we don't > need the drm_encoder_slave stuff - all that goes away since it's no > longer necessary. > > We also solve this problem as well - because we're then not messing > around with working out if there's a DT node present: the TDA998x > device must pre-exist. For non-DT setups, this can be done when > the I2C bus is created - devices on it would be created using the > standard mechanisms already present via the i2c_board_data array. > For DT setups, the devices are created by parsing the I2C bus node > in DT. > > Both cases result in a component being registered upon invocation of > tda998x_probe(), and removal of the component when tda998x_remove() > is called. The tda998x driver becomes a standard I2C driver. > > This is something I've been intending to look at now that the component > stuff is in place - as I said previously when the questions around DT > and Armada DRM were first posed, we need to solve these issues in a > generic way first, rather than hacking around them. Agree. I was looking in the same direction... -- Ken ar c'henta? | ** Breizh ha Linux atav! ** Jef | http://moinejf.free.fr/