video/da8xx-fb fbdev driver enhance to support TI am335x SoC
v2 cover video/da8xx-fb fbdev driver enhance to support TI am335x SoC
Changes in v2:
Addressing review comments from Tomi Valkeinen:
Dropped readl/writel patch
Many cosmetic changes to make code easier to understand
This is primarily a resend of a series of patches that were original submitted to linux-fbdev back in January of 2013 for 3.8 by Afzal Mohammed. I have rebased them on 3.10 and also made sure they apply cleanly to the 'for-next' branch of linux-fbdev git. The patches enable use of the current mainline da8xx-fb driver on the TI AM335x SOC along with some bug fixes and cleanup.
The original patch series can be found here:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-fbdev/list/?submitter9101
if you want to see the history.
Afzal Mohammed (20):
video: da8xx-fb: fb_check_var enhancement
video: da8xx-fb: simplify lcd_reset
video: da8xx-fb: use modedb helper to update var
video: da8xx-fb: remove unneeded "var" initialization
video: da8xx-fb: store current display information
video: da8xx-fb: store clk rate even if !CPUFREQ
video: da8xx-fb: pix clk and clk div handling cleanup
video: da8xx-fb: store struct device *
video: da8xx-fb: report correct pixclock
video: da8xx-fb: fb_set_par support
video: da8xx-fb: enable sync lost intr for v2 ip
video: da8xx-fb: use devres
video: da8xx-fb: ensure non-null cfg in pdata
video: da8xx-fb: reorganize panel detection
video: da8xx-fb: invoke platform callback safely
video: da8xx-fb: minimal dt support
video: da8xx-fb: obtain fb_videomode info from dt
video: da8xx-fb: ensure pdata only for non-dt
video: da8xx-fb: setup struct lcd_ctrl_config for dt
video: da8xx-fb: set upstream clock rate (if reqd)
Darren Etheridge (3):
video: da8xx-fb: improve readability of code
video: da8xx-fb: make clock naming consistent
video/da8xx-fb adding am33xx as dependency
Manjunathappa, Prakash (1):
video: da8xx-fb: fix 24bpp raster configuration
.../devicetree/bindings/video/fb-da8xx.txt | 37 ++ drivers/video/Kconfig | 7 +- drivers/video/da8xx-fb.c | 392 +++++++++++++------- include/video/da8xx-fb.h | 5 + 4 files changed, 299 insertions(+), 142 deletions(-) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/video/fb-da8xx.txt
Hi,
Quoted 13 lines · Darren Etheridge
Changes in v2:
Addressing review comments from Tomi Valkeinen:
Dropped readl/writel patch
Many cosmetic changes to make code easier to understandThis is primarily a resend of a series of patches that were original submitted to linux-fbdev back in January of 2013 for 3.8 by Afzal Mohammed. I have rebased them on 3.10 and also made sure they apply cleanly to the 'for-next' branch of linux-fbdev git. The patches enable use of the current mainline da8xx-fb driver on the TI AM335x SOC along with some bug fixes and cleanup.
Quoted 3 lines
The original patch series can be found here:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-fbdev/list/?submitter=39101
if you want to see the history.
Comments on the whole series:
Most of the patches are originally from Afzal. I believe some of the patches are unchanged, but some are changed by you. In cases like this you should pick one of the following options for each patch:
- If the patch is unchanged, send the patch as it is, having From: Afzal line there.
- If you have changed the patch, send the patch having From: Afzal line, but marking in the description that you've changed it (and what you did). This should be done if the changes are small.
- If you changed a lot in the patch, send the patch with yourself as the author, signed off by only you, but mention that it's based on Afzal's work.
The point here is that if you change the patch, it's no longer Afzal's original patch. Afzal hasn't reviewed it, so signed-off-by Afzal is not correct. You could've introduced horrible bugs in the patch, and I'm sure Afzal doesn't want to see that a patch in the kernel introducing horrible bugs is from him (when it is not from him).
Of course, if you have actively discussed the patches with Afzal, and he's okay with all the changes you've made, then the patches are fine.
Another thing are the DT related patches. They should be sent to [email protected] for review. And I think the DT patches should be squashed into one, as they are quite short and having them as a whole makes it easier to look at them. You could probably move the DT patches to a separate series, so that we can merge the rest of the improvements, and manage DT separately.
Tomi
Tomi Valkeinen <[email protected]> wrote on Wed [2013-Jul-31 13:04:33 +0300]:
Quoted 33 lines
Hi,
Quoted 13 lines · Darren Etheridge
Changes in v2:
Addressing review comments from Tomi Valkeinen:
Dropped readl/writel patch
Many cosmetic changes to make code easier to understandThis is primarily a resend of a series of patches that were original submitted to linux-fbdev back in January of 2013 for 3.8 by Afzal Mohammed. I have rebased them on 3.10 and also made sure they apply cleanly to the 'for-next' branch of linux-fbdev git. The patches enable use of the current mainline da8xx-fb driver on the TI AM335x SOC along with some bug fixes and cleanup.
Quoted 3 lines
The original patch series can be found here:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-fbdev/list/?submitter9101
if you want to see the history.Comments on the whole series:
Most of the patches are originally from Afzal. I believe some of the patches are unchanged, but some are changed by you. In cases like this you should pick one of the following options for each patch:
- If the patch is unchanged, send the patch as it is, having From: Afzal line there.
- If you have changed the patch, send the patch having From: Afzal line, but marking in the description that you've changed it (and what you did). This should be done if the changes are small.
Quoted 7 lines
- If you changed a lot in the patch, send the patch with yourself as the author, signed off by only you, but mention that it's based on Afzal's work. The point here is that if you change the patch, it's no longer Afzal's original patch. Afzal hasn't reviewed it, so signed-off-by Afzal is not correct. You could've introduced horrible bugs in the patch, and I'm sure Afzal doesn't want to see that a patch in the kernel introducing horrible bugs is from him (when it is not from him).
Understood, and I have made the changes accordingly in the updated series I am preparing.
Quoted 6 lines
Another thing are the DT related patches. They should be sent to [email protected] for review. And I think the DT patches should be squashed into one, as they are quite short and having them as a whole makes it easier to look at them. You could probably move the DT patches to a separate series, so that we can merge the rest of the improvements, and manage DT separately.
This is no problem to do, I have extracted the DT patches from the series and will submit them separately and include the devicetree list.
Thanks for taking the time to review so thoroughly.
Darren
Darren Etheridge <[email protected]> wrote on Thu [2013-Aug-01 09:06:50 -0500]:
Quoted 41 lines
Tomi Valkeinen <[email protected]> wrote on Wed [2013-Jul-31 13:04:33 +0300]:
Quoted 33 lines
Hi,
Quoted 13 lines · Darren Etheridge
Changes in v2:
Addressing review comments from Tomi Valkeinen:
Dropped readl/writel patch
Many cosmetic changes to make code easier to understandThis is primarily a resend of a series of patches that were original submitted to linux-fbdev back in January of 2013 for 3.8 by Afzal Mohammed. I have rebased them on 3.10 and also made sure they apply cleanly to the 'for-next' branch of linux-fbdev git. The patches enable use of the current mainline da8xx-fb driver on the TI AM335x SOC along with some bug fixes and cleanup.
Quoted 3 lines
The original patch series can be found here:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-fbdev/list/?submitter9101
if you want to see the history.Comments on the whole series:
Most of the patches are originally from Afzal. I believe some of the patches are unchanged, but some are changed by you. In cases like this you should pick one of the following options for each patch:
- If the patch is unchanged, send the patch as it is, having From: Afzal line there.
- If you have changed the patch, send the patch having From: Afzal line, but marking in the description that you've changed it (and what you did). This should be done if the changes are small.
Quoted 7 lines
- If you changed a lot in the patch, send the patch with yourself as the author, signed off by only you, but mention that it's based on Afzal's work. The point here is that if you change the patch, it's no longer Afzal's original patch. Afzal hasn't reviewed it, so signed-off-by Afzal is not correct. You could've introduced horrible bugs in the patch, and I'm sure Afzal doesn't want to see that a patch in the kernel introducing horrible bugs is from him (when it is not from him).
Quoted 3 lines
Understood, and I have made the changes accordingly in the updated series I am preparing.
Tomi,
I will be sending the updated series on Monday. I have also now integrated Prabhakar Lad's devm_ changes, just doing testing now.
Thanks,
Darren