linux-kernel - Re: [RESENT PATCH] drm/panel: support Innolux P097PFG panel

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 30 Nov 2017 18:54:59 -0800
From:   Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
To:     Lin Huang <hl@...k-chips.com>
Cc:     thierry.reding@...il.com, zyw@...k-chips.com,
        seanpaul@...omium.org, nickey.yang@...k-chips.com,
        airlied@...ux.ie, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Derek Basehore <dbasehore@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [RESENT PATCH] drm/panel: support Innolux P097PFG panel

One more comment:

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 02:14:40PM +0800, Lin Huang wrote:
> Support Innolux P097PFG 9.7" 1536x2048 TFT LCD panel,
> it refactor Innolux P079ZCA panel driver, let it support
> multi panel, and add support P097PFG panel in this driver.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lin Huang <hl@...k-chips.com>
> 
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-innolux-p079zca.c | 178 ++++++++++++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 136 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-innolux-p079zca.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-innolux-p079zca.c
> index 6ba9344..a40798f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-innolux-p079zca.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-innolux-p079zca.c
...

> @@ -209,20 +284,39 @@ static const struct drm_panel_funcs innolux_panel_funcs = {
>  };
>  
>  static const struct of_device_id innolux_of_match[] = {
> -	{ .compatible = "innolux,p079zca", },
> -	{ }
> +	{ .compatible = "innolux,p079zca",
> +	  .data = &innolux_p079zca_panel_desc
> +	},
> +	{ .compatible = "innolux,p097pfg",
> +	  .data = &innolux_p097pfg_panel_desc
> +	}
>  };
>  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, innolux_of_match);
>  
> -static int innolux_panel_add(struct innolux_panel *innolux)
> +static int innolux_panel_add(struct mipi_dsi_device *dsi,
> +			     const struct panel_desc_dsi *desc)
>  {
> -	struct device *dev = &innolux->link->dev;
> +	struct innolux_panel *innolux;
> +	struct device *dev = &dsi->dev;
>  	struct device_node *np;
>  	int err;
>  
> -	innolux->supply = devm_regulator_get(dev, "power");
> -	if (IS_ERR(innolux->supply))
> -		return PTR_ERR(innolux->supply);
> +	innolux = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*innolux), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!innolux)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	innolux->dsi_desc = desc;
> +	innolux->vddi = devm_regulator_get_optional(dev, "power");
> +	if (IS_ERR(innolux->vddi))
> +		return PTR_ERR(innolux->vddi);
> +
> +	innolux->avdd = devm_regulator_get(dev, "ppvarp");

This name ("ppvarp" and the "ppvarn" below) are names from our board
schematics, not from the panel datasheet. I would think these should be
"vdd" and "vee", like your variable names.

Brian

> +	if (IS_ERR(innolux->avdd))
> +		return PTR_ERR(innolux->avdd);
> +
> +	innolux->avee = devm_regulator_get(dev, "ppvarn");
> +	if (IS_ERR(innolux->avee))
> +		return PTR_ERR(innolux->avee);
>  
>  	innolux->enable_gpio = devm_gpiod_get_optional(dev, "enable",
>  						       GPIOD_OUT_HIGH);
...