From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Imre Deak Subject: Re: omapfb -- panel initialization inflexibility Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 14:35:54 +0200 Message-ID: <1133786154.7902.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20051203034219.GA1516@localhost.localdomain> Reply-To: imre.deak@nokia.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20051203034219.GA1516@localhost.localdomain> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-omap-open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com Errors-To: linux-omap-open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com To: ext Brian Swetland Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org Actually there is no requirement on calling panel->enable() before omapfb_set_update_mode(), which enables the LCD DMA. It's even possible to enable / disable the panel while having the LCD DMA active. So lets simply switch the order of the two calls in omapfb_probe and the suspend / resume functions. Please send a patch. --Imre On Fri, 2005-12-02 at 19:42 -0800, ext Brian Swetland wrote: > I have an lcd panel connected to a omap730 based system that *requires* > that MCK, HSYNC, and VSYNC are active when it is powered on. It will > not initialize correctly otherwise. > > I've modified my omapfb driver so that there is a new OMAP_LCDC_* > flag (OMAP_LCDC_PANEL_INIT_AFTER_LCDC) that determines if the > enable hook is called where it is in the existing driver, or if > it is called after omapfb_set_update_mode() returns. > > Any objections to this workaround? Any suggestions for a better > name for the flag? Is there a better value than 0x200 for the flag? > > Thanks, > > Brian > _______________________________________________ > Linux-omap-open-source mailing list > Linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com > http://linux.omap.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-omap-open-source