From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomi Valkeinen Subject: Re: [PATCH] OMAP: DSS: add FEAT_DPI_USES_VDDS_DSI to omap3630_dss_feat_list Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 13:58:59 +0200 Message-ID: <50CF0903.8010205@ti.com> References: <20121216080803.618a3634@notabene.brown> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig939FBE17013E78EDF1ED012F" Return-path: Received: from arroyo.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.40]:43948 "EHLO arroyo.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752393Ab2LQL7o (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Dec 2012 06:59:44 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20121216080803.618a3634@notabene.brown> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: NeilBrown Cc: Chandrabhanu Mahapatra , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org --------------enig939FBE17013E78EDF1ED012F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2012-12-15 23:08, NeilBrown wrote: >=20 > commit 195e672a76056478cc79f5c48343164c9237852e > OMAPDSS: DPI: Remove cpu_is_xxxx checks >=20 > made the mistake of assuming that cpu_is_omap34xx() is exclusive of > other cpu_is_* predicates whereas it includes cpu_is_omap3630(). >=20 > So on an omap3630, code that was previously enabled by > if (cpu_is_omap34xx()) > is now disabled as > dss_has_feature(FEAT_DPI_USES_VDDS_DSI) > fails. >=20 > So add FEAT_DPI_USES_VDDS_DSI to omap3630_dss_feat_list. >=20 > Cc: Chandrabhanu Mahapatra > Cc: Tomi Valkeinen > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown >=20 > diff --git a/drivers/video/omap2/dss/dss_features.c b/drivers/video/oma= p2/dss/dss_features.c > index acbc1e1..aaf3c3f 100644 > --- a/drivers/video/omap2/dss/dss_features.c > +++ b/drivers/video/omap2/dss/dss_features.c > @@ -546,6 +546,7 @@ static const enum dss_feat_id omap3630_dss_feat_lis= t[] =3D { > FEAT_ALPHA_FIXED_ZORDER, > FEAT_FIFO_MERGE, > FEAT_OMAP3_DSI_FIFO_BUG, > + FEAT_DPI_USES_VDDS_DSI, > }; > =20 > static const enum dss_feat_id omap4430_es1_0_dss_feat_list[] =3D { >=20 Thanks, looks correct. Did you encounter a bug related to this, or just happened to notice? Tomi --------------enig939FBE17013E78EDF1ED012F Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQzwkDAAoJEPo9qoy8lh71tlcP/RNynhZQmeI2p1tA1a8weBTf nxteeRdkzSt95I17TXiuoGrbMiWBJ0bIbPChszPcCt9jMtiJNFVFLXpR12nOCwW3 6r09lAYLWcvYTdzBwsAQ1MwsuXil3dv7nKbtDxife/Y9qG9kkkT53y+6rgiTcdd3 QewnEzUiSEBKSeaO3/tK6cC6eECWGwJOWsfXpULiHsWszFZSj5nWj7lg5vqoMft2 MW/DXZ2VcKFbJ1BVzmV3zeygwqh/kmpE5ojruyZXxt43E5ye9p+6i0hKSkFVghWp I3SyAbBe1PzBBJmgVXvy6Pp9IiwfBEaMNwJoLlDlQg4H7N/CRRaglk2a7rV6IqDe Qz3YTqhLf8OLT2mQJdp/1BxBBvt9FTSRAU8bkU9ka/EFxd/LSD3/HB1oOLxGhYaX IRbOCwZF5WromJmqGEW7QKgrhiYQU63zv8tetw8fGqII1hGnQnp7/itXz7Cy55iR pcW+6aWOKZGUHHIIMCdrDJ56XXxP8hg/JkGl8DgtLZ3z3rOR1yMsaR2L2bRJN2pW 8CqhL00Y1YbPxY+ls1zFrkg7mIURzMPmlaKmyrcAzdNE7hs109KuWK3I0YiPtpQj LE7y7qmRgQvsK5MmDhkh91pAVdafgyOeQzTSYVZnuLpmncwa15UVWo/aNGFx1k5w yEMNaqEDwfsJBSzUTK/G =xX0l -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig939FBE17013E78EDF1ED012F--