[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAOTY_82Z_DQuJWDD5NMeq35o2Tf-zQzmSxJwRYRRpHQJVHNEA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 07:46:44 +0800
From: Chun-Kuang Hu <chunkuang.hu@...nel.org>
To: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...nel.org>
Cc: Chun-Kuang Hu <chunkuang.hu@...nel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support"
<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>, CK Hu <ck.hu@...iatek.com>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] drm/mediatek: Change disp/ddp term to mutex in mtk
mutex driver
Hi, Matthias:
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...nel.org> 於 2021年1月21日 週四 上午2:27寫道:
>
> On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 07:17:27AM +0800, Chun-Kuang Hu wrote:
> > From: CK Hu <ck.hu@...iatek.com>
> >
> > mtk mutex is used by both drm and mdp driver, so change disp/ddp term to
> > mutex to show that it's a common driver for drm and mdp.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: CK Hu <ck.hu@...iatek.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Chun-Kuang Hu <chunkuang.hu@...nel.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_crtc.c | 30 +--
> > drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c | 2 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.h | 2 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_mutex.c | 305 ++++++++++++------------
> > drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_mutex.h | 26 +-
> > 5 files changed, 182 insertions(+), 183 deletions(-)
> >
> [...]
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_mutex.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_mutex.c
> > index 1c8a253f4788..98a060bf225d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_mutex.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_mutex.c
> [...]
> >
> > -static const struct of_device_id ddp_driver_dt_match[] = {
> > +static const struct of_device_id mutex_driver_dt_match[] = {
> > { .compatible = "mediatek,mt2701-disp-mutex",
> > - .data = &mt2701_ddp_driver_data},
> > + .data = &mt2701_mutex_driver_data},
> > { .compatible = "mediatek,mt2712-disp-mutex",
> > - .data = &mt2712_ddp_driver_data},
> > + .data = &mt2712_mutex_driver_data},
> > { .compatible = "mediatek,mt8167-disp-mutex",
> > - .data = &mt8167_ddp_driver_data},
> > + .data = &mt8167_mutex_driver_data},
> > { .compatible = "mediatek,mt8173-disp-mutex",
> > - .data = &mt8173_ddp_driver_data},
> > + .data = &mt8173_mutex_driver_data},
> > {},
> > };
> > -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, ddp_driver_dt_match);
> > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, mutex_driver_dt_match);
>
> I think it would make sense in a follow-up patch to update the binding
> to use "mediatek,mt2701-mutex" to reflect that mutex is used for drm and
> mdp driver. Make sense?
Yes, it make sense. I would try to update the binding, but I wonder
device tree should be backward compatible? Let's discuss in that
follow-up patches.
Regards,
Chun-Kuang.
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
Powered by blists - more mailing lists