[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87zixmy3kd.fsf@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2015 12:07:46 +0200
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>
To: Archit Taneja <architt@...eaurora.org>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, daniel@...ll.ch
Cc: a.hajda@...sung.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
airlied@...ux.ie, treding@...dia.com, l.stach@...gutronix.de,
robh@...nel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] drm/dsi: Try to match non-DT dsi devices
On Mon, 07 Dec 2015, Archit Taneja <architt@...eaurora.org> wrote:
> On 12/07/2015 02:40 PM, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> On Mon, 07 Dec 2015, Archit Taneja <architt@...eaurora.org> wrote:
>>> On 12/07/2015 02:15 PM, Jani Nikula wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 07 Dec 2015, Archit Taneja <architt@...eaurora.org> wrote:
>>>>> Any suggestions on how to fix this? Is it ok to make DRM_MIPI_DSI
>>>>> depend on CONFIG_OF?
>>>>
>>>> Please don't.
>>>
>>> Just curious, how did x86 use DSI if the only way to create DSI devices
>>> until now was via DT?
>>
>> Oh, you want the gory details... we use the DSI code as a library for
>> abstraction and helpers, without actually creating or registering the
>> devices.
>
> Okay, got it. I'll go with the IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) approach.
Thanks, appreciated, so i915 doesn't need to depend on OF.
> Humble request: Next time if I share something that doesn't make sense,
> please reply with something more than a "Please don't". That just sounds
> condescending and doesn't really help me with my cause either.
That's a fair request, no need to be humble about it. Apologies.
BR,
Jani.
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
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