From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org,
InKi Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com>,
Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.33] s3c-fb: Fix divide by zero and broken output
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 00:01:16 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100115000115.GA27344@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100114150658.643294f1.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 03:06:58PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Why on earth would you revert someone's patch and not tell them that
> you're doing it?
Through oversight, sorry - the original patch was an incremental update
to the driver rather than a reversion so I CCed the relevant maintainers
then and maintained the same CC list for the followup.
> This reversion will presumably break the Samsung SoC Framebuffer again.
> How about we not do that?
It's not entirely clear that there is any breakage to fix. Certainly
the SMDK6410 I have works perfectly fine with the reversion, and I've
had a report that the hct board does too (which makes two out of the
three mainline users AFAICT). Since none of the boards in mainline
supply a refresh parameter they'll all be failing with the current code.
Ben's analysis, which seemed reasonable to me, was that the patch is
based on a misunderstanding of the units in which the pixclk parameter
is specified. He wrote:
| Thirdly he's changed the code to calculate the divider to assume pixclk
| is a frequency, and not a time-period. It clearly stats in the docs
| that pixclk is in picoseconds. Our clock rate is in Hz.
My understanding is that the breakage that was believed to exist was
based on the driver misbehaving if you supply the pixclk as a frequency,
which isn't surprising since that's what it's looking for. The effect
of the patch is to change the interpretation of pixclk value so that a
refresh rate must also be specified but either way it should be possible
to specify a working configuration.
There's possibly a case to be made for changing the platform data over
to specify things differently, I'm not sufficiently familiar with the
area to say one way or another, but given that the original method works
and existing machine are broken by the change it seems safer to revert
at least for -rc.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-01-15 0:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-13 16:16 [PATCH 2.6.33] s3c-fb: Fix handling of missing refresh in platform data Mark Brown
2010-01-14 7:36 ` Ben Dooks
2010-01-14 10:20 ` Mark Brown
2010-01-14 10:26 ` [PATCH 2.6.33] s3c-fb: Fix divide by zero and broken output Mark Brown
2010-01-14 23:06 ` Andrew Morton
2010-01-15 0:01 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2010-01-15 0:16 ` Mark Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100115000115.GA27344@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ben-linux@fluff.org \
--cc=inki.dae@samsung.com \
--cc=kmpark@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=stable@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox