On Sun, 2025-08-03 at 12:26 -0400, Alexandre Demers wrote: > On Fri, Aug 1, 2025 at 6:02 PM Timur Kristóf > <timur.kris...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Alexandre, > > > > With regards to the coding style. I already replied to your other > > thread about it, let's have that conversation there. > > > > With regards to the link encoders specifically. Due to DVI-I, we > > need dce110_link_encoder to handle analog signals in addition to > > digital, so the question about this part is, is there any need to > > have a separate dce110_analog_link_encoder? When I wrote the patch > > I felt yes, but now I feel maybe we should just let > > dce110_link_encoder handle VGA as well. > > > > What do you think about that? > > > > Thanks, > > Timur > > > > > > > > Since a distinction is already made in the code between digital and > analog encoders, I would be tempted to go with the > dce110_analog_link_encoder so it may be just easier/quicker to > distinguish what this part of code does. > > Alexandre
Well, that's the issue. The distinction isn't really there: - dce110_link_encoder does both analog and digital for DVI-I - dce110_analog_link_encoder can only do analog for VGA At this point I feel that adding the dce110_analog_link_encoder just creates unnecessary confusion. Since dce110_link_encoder does both analog and digital already, it will make more sense to have just dce110_link_encoder. I'll make that change in v2 of this series. Timur
