[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090924163240.d03127e3.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 16:32:40 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
Cc: linux-fbdev-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, michael.hennerich@...log.com,
cooloney@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fbdev: bfin-lq035q1-fb: new Blackfin Landscape LCD
EZ-Extender driver
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 17:37:06 -0400
Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org> wrote:
> From: Michael Hennerich <michael.hennerich@...log.com>
>
> Framebuffer driver for the Landscape LCD EZ-Extender (ADZS-BFLLCD-EZEXT)
> http://docs.blackfin.uclinux.org/doku.php?id=hw:cards:landscape_lcd_ez-extender
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Hennerich <michael.hennerich@...log.com>
> Signed-off-by: Bryan Wu <cooloney@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
>
> ...
>
> +config FB_BFIN_LQ035Q1
> + tristate "SHARP LQ035Q1DH02 TFT LCD"
> + depends on FB && BLACKFIN
> + select FB_CFB_FILLRECT
> + select FB_CFB_COPYAREA
> + select FB_CFB_IMAGEBLIT
> + select BFIN_GPTIMERS
> + select SPI
Are we sure about the `select SPI'? There's only one other place in
the kernel which does this, and `select' often makes things explode. I
fear that you're either selecting the wrong thing or you're selecting
something which won't work well.
> + help
> + This is the framebuffer device driver for a SHARP LQ035Q1DH02 TFT display found on
> + the Blackfin Landscape LCD EZ-Extender Card.
> + This display is a QVGA 320x240 18-bit RGB display interfaced by an 16-bit wide PPI
> + It uses PPI[0..15] PPI_FS1, PPI_FS2 and PPI_CLK.
>
>
> ...
>
> +
> +#define DRIVER_NAME "bfin-lq035q1"
> +static char driver_name[] = DRIVER_NAME;
Will the compielr magically put this string into read-only storage for
us, or should we do that manually with `const'?
>
> ...
>
> +static int lq035q1_control(unsigned char reg, unsigned short value)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + u8 regs[3] = {LQ035_INDEX, 0, 0};
> + u8 dat[3] = {LQ035_DATA, 0, 0};
> +
> + if (spi_control.spidev) {
> + regs[2] = reg;
> + dat[1] = value >> 8;
> + dat[2] = value & 0xFF;
> +
> + ret = spi_write(spi_control.spidev, regs, ARRAY_SIZE(regs));
> + ret |= spi_write(spi_control.spidev, dat, ARRAY_SIZE(dat));
> + } else
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
I am suspecting that this function (and the similar ones below) rely
upon state within the hardware and will hence misbehave if two
instances are run concurrently.
Is that correct> If so, is there locking to prevent this from occurring?
>
> ...
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists