From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomi Valkeinen Subject: Re: [PATCH] OMAPDSS: Add timings for ChiMei G121S1-L01/L02 and G121X1-L01 LCD displays Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:51:41 +0300 Message-ID: <1343721101.4685.35.camel@lappyti> References: <20120717140140.GC3850@renkinjitsu.usine.8d.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-KCU4MooOZB9bXrsZ5SOX" Return-path: Received: from na3sys009aog120.obsmtp.com ([74.125.149.140]:53699 "EHLO na3sys009aog120.obsmtp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752171Ab2GaHvq (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jul 2012 03:51:46 -0400 Received: by lbol5 with SMTP id l5so3455508lbo.6 for ; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 00:51:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Jassi Brar Cc: Raphael Assenat , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Archit Taneja --=-KCU4MooOZB9bXrsZ5SOX Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 21:57 +0530, Jassi Brar wrote: > [CC'ing OMAPDSS matinainer] >=20 > On 17 July 2012 19:31, Raphael Assenat wrote: > > Add timings for ChiMei G121S1-L01/L02 and G121X1-L01 LCD displays. > > > Display panels are board specific and there is no limit to the number > of panels that could be connected to omap dss. > Does it make sense to get panel params via DT? Or at least have them > come from board file? (esp when there is hardly a panel shared by two > boards, and some panels aren't even used by any board in mainline) So we have two options, with pros and cons: 1) Have the configuration for countless panels specified in the driver - Pro: driver for the device is the right place to define hardcoded device properties - Pro: panels can be easily used from the board file, just define the name of the panel - Pro: the same panel can be easily used from multiple board files, without duplicating the configs - Con: Adds lines to the kernel (not really a con, all features add lines to the kernel. and we can restructure the data to fit fewer lines.) - Con: We could have "leftover" panel data, not used by anyone. 2) Have the configuration for countless panels specified in the DT data - Con: DT data is not the right place to describe device's internal hardcoded properties. DT data should be about HW connections and configurable options. - Con: Adds lines to the DT data What were the pros for option 2? I didn't really see them in this mail thread, except moving lines from the kernel to the DT, which I don't really see as a pro. Tomi --=-KCU4MooOZB9bXrsZ5SOX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJQF46NAAoJEPo9qoy8lh71g/0P/2NgbewYdlH6AenRfFlRAq2C +qcNfXJczPaT7vTqzbJO8CxkZif5WPdXpQOKFYswZVfCtlAED0UzNUBTeb+kg6nd lpVaG0wgFaaYwgR9KjpCww4eFvji/xaXWCdZ9rIWwDGwCn0NtZZVMdGZjkRheZMc PpY4Y/c0MdSTbqikp8O4H7D/z7jh9JLuLApcICkDV0+EOVFzZTJWm0Lhw8SbUjSY AhodpgpDhLPhEGzcxZLyt6EmfuluOVZTqUUaLMATYlDldt2Xuaa1AkqlHwea/Cpu qOnu7uIHK2rAmb9T27WWWLK2+GztmN6orrDzRsDgXRqEpM8ogrEhx3uSzkePea1Q zlrL2nYUbUsLRaAPiFKy6yMCPdu8CgF0jhcNaZTaZnjyKhs6Q1uyEOyosbkM6XBI HBm4tP0r0kAvXZnLWBbfMVhdJsRLCUilX80nkDNoJaVm0aPI1xCk7a+lRswVODnb LD+xH2iIXW8gmK4wCvRpHqIgIzia4cXh4GP/hIEX4Naa9Mznb+WuN6BfYBDeBvsL fsDoi9LB8yh5TX1wKas/08dd24MIcIopziz7iTDX4ZXDLjNdKU17erzmiI8Se7p8 aZ31cA0/5OcgB5A5fG0e65EBiNHT7U5qHAeRxTGNoXodywi1Xv2h/5bNy14i4Mxj B+2Mjh/J+xD+XObSOcUL =invO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-KCU4MooOZB9bXrsZ5SOX--