[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3b6ec59d-4fad-52f9-e96a-55a25ff3cfb4@tronnes.org>
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2022 19:06:14 +0200
From: Noralf Trønnes <noralf@...nnes.org>
To: Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech>
Cc: Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>,
Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>,
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>,
Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, Emma Anholt <emma@...olt.net>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>,
linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Phil Elwell <phil@...pberrypi.com>,
Mateusz Kwiatkowski <kfyatek+publicgit@...il.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Dave Stevenson <dave.stevenson@...pberrypi.com>,
linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Dom Cobley <dom@...pberrypi.com>,
Noralf Trønnes <noralf@...nnes.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 34/35] drm/modes: Introduce the tv_mode property as a
command-line option
Den 26.08.2022 08.46, skrev Maxime Ripard:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 02:41:27PM +0200, Noralf Trønnes wrote:
>> Den 24.08.2022 17.45, skrev Maxime Ripard:
>>> Hi Noralf,
>>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 10:18:47PM +0200, Noralf Trønnes wrote:
>>>> Den 29.07.2022 18.35, skrev Maxime Ripard:
>>>>> Our new tv mode option allows to specify the TV mode from a property.
>>>>> However, it can still be useful, for example to avoid any boot time
>>>>> artifact, to set that property directly from the kernel command line.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's add some code to allow it, and some unit tests to exercise that code.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In the subject it says "tv_mode property", but the property is called
>>>> "tv norm", so the option should be tv_norm?
>>>
>>> Yeah... I don't know. mode is taken but it's obviously the best name. So
>>> I went with norm to avoid the (internal) conflict but I left mode for
>>> the user facing property.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what's best here, or maybe we can pick another name entirely?
>>>
>>
>> Why not just call it "tv mode" or even better "TV Mode". The state
>> member can be called tv_mode, but the mode_config member will need a
>> temporary name until the "mode" property is removed. tv_tv_mode or maybe
>> connector_tv_mode?
>
> Yeah, that seems like a good idea. Would legacy_tv_mode work for you?
>
Oh yeah, renaming the "mode" property, that works fine.
Noralf.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists