[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aba35ecb-2357-4c4f-8366-08d14e40d436@linux.dev>
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2024 03:10:21 +0800
From: Sui Jingfeng <sui.jingfeng@...ux.dev>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
Liu Ying <victor.liu@....com>
Cc: dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
imx@...ts.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org,
p.zabel@...gutronix.de, airlied@...il.com, daniel@...ll.ch,
maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com, mripard@...nel.org, tzimmermann@...e.de,
robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
shawnguo@...nel.org, s.hauer@...gutronix.de, kernel@...gutronix.de,
festevam@...il.com, tglx@...utronix.de, vkoul@...nel.org, kishon@...nel.org,
aisheng.dong@....com, agx@...xcpu.org, francesco@...cini.it, frank.li@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/19] Add Freescale i.MX8qxp Display Controller
support
Hi,
On 7/28/24 00:39, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch series aims to add Freescale i.MX8qxp Display Controller support.
>>
>> The controller is comprised of three main components that include a blit
>> engine for 2D graphics accelerations, display controller for display output
>> processing, as well as a command sequencer.
>>
>> Previous patch series attempts to do that can be found at:
>> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/84524/
>>
>> This series addresses Maxime's comments on the previous one:
>> a. Split the display controller into multiple internal devices.
>> 1) List display engine, pixel engine, interrupt controller and more as the
>> controller's child devices.
>> 2) List display engine and pixel engine's processing units as their child
>> devices.
>>
>> b. Add minimal feature support.
>> Only support two display pipelines with primary planes with XR24 fb,
>> backed by two fetchunits. No fetchunit dynamic allocation logic(to be done
>> when necessary).
>>
>> c. Use drm_dev_{enter, exit}().
>>
>> Since this series changes a lot comparing to the previous one, I choose to
>> send it with a new patch series, not a new version.
> I'm sorry, I have started reviewing v2 without noticing that there is a
> v3 already.
>
> Let me summarize my comments:
>
> - You are using OF aliases. Are they documented and acked by DT
> maintainers?
>
> - I generally feel that the use of so many small devices to declare
> functional blocks is an abuse of the DT. Please consider creating
> _small_ units from the driver code directly rather than going throught
> the components.
Well, I really don't think so. I don't agree.
I have checked the DTSpec[1] before type, the spec isn't define how
many is considered to be "many", and the spec isn't define to what
extent is think to be "small" as well.
[1]
https://github.com/devicetree-org/devicetree-specification/releases/tag/v0.4
--
Best regards
Sui
Powered by blists - more mailing lists