linux-kernel - Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: [RFC PATCH 02/11] drm: sun4i: add support for H3 mixers

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]

Message-ID: <695DFDD0-1925-433C-AB88-B90EE461C203@aosc.io>
Date:   Sat, 20 May 2017 01:49:58 +0800
From:   Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.io>
To:     maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com,
        Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
CC:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com,
        Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.xyz>
Subject: Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: [RFC PATCH 02/11] drm: sun4i: add support for H3 mixers



于 2017年5月20日 GMT+08:00 上午1:47:29, Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com> 写到:
>On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 12:43:45AM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
>> From: Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.xyz>
>> 
>> Allwinner H3 SoC has two mixers, one has 1 VI channel and 3 UI
>channels,
>> and the other has 1 VI and 1 UI.
>> 
>> Add support for these two variants.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.xyz>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun8i_mixer.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun8i_mixer.c
>b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun8i_mixer.c
>> index cb193c5f1686..d658a3a8159a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun8i_mixer.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun8i_mixer.c
>> @@ -390,11 +390,29 @@ static const struct sun8i_mixer_cfg
>sun8i_v3s_mixer_cfg = {
>>  	.ui_num = 1,
>>  };
>>  
>> +static const struct sun8i_mixer_cfg sun8i_h3_mixer0_cfg = {
>> +	.vi_num = 1,
>> +	.ui_num = 3,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const struct sun8i_mixer_cfg sun8i_h3_mixer1_cfg = {
>> +	.vi_num = 1,
>> +	.ui_num = 1,
>> +};
>> +
>>  static const struct of_device_id sun8i_mixer_of_table[] = {
>>  	{
>>  		.compatible = "allwinner,sun8i-v3s-de2-mixer",
>>  		.data = &sun8i_v3s_mixer_cfg,
>>  	},
>> +	{
>> +		.compatible = "allwinner,sun8i-h3-de2-mixer0",
>> +		.data = &sun8i_h3_mixer0_cfg
>> +	},
>> +	{
>> +		.compatible = "allwinner,sun8i-h3-de2-mixer1",
>> +		.data = &sun8i_h3_mixer1_cfg
>> +	},
>
>So the only difference between the two is the number of ui planes?

Not only., but currently we only implemented this.

More functions differ, but we still don't support them...

>
>Why not create a property to give the number then, instead of a
>compatible?
>
>Maxime