From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com (Maxime Ripard) Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 16:19:57 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v2 04/11] drm: sun4i: add support for H3's TCON0/1 In-Reply-To: <52F9F9C7-9A9C-435D-A0AF-FDD4317DAD69@aosc.io> References: <20170604160149.30230-1-icenowy@aosc.io> <20170604160149.30230-5-icenowy@aosc.io> <3642057.oKT9kIlu8M@jernej-laptop> <493AC6F2-3CB3-48F5-9568-A34AA927238F@aosc.io> <20170607094343.qqiwnu2mhmoi6jn7@flea.lan> <52F9F9C7-9A9C-435D-A0AF-FDD4317DAD69@aosc.io> Message-ID: <20170607141957.akonr7hmuwpt7hlt@flea.lan> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 05:44:56PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > ? 2017?6?7? GMT+08:00 ??5:43:43, Maxime Ripard ??: > >On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 03:03:47AM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > >> >You should also expand function sun4i_drv_node_is_tcon() at > >sun4i_drv.c > >> >with > >> >new entries, but I'm not sure if this fits in this patch. > >> > >> Instead I think it should be renamed to something like > >> "sun4i_drv_node_is_tcon_with_ch0". > > > >I'm not sure, or at least, it shouldn't make any difference, since > >TCON without a channel 0 will not have an endpoint 0, so this will be > >dealt with already. > > But that will prevent new coders from add CH1-less TCON > compatibles to this function. Why? We already have such TCONs (like the A33's, or V3S') in that function. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: not available URL: