Hi Laurent,
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:58 AM, Laurent Pinchart
<[email protected]> wrote:
> The internal LVDS encoders now have their own DT bindings. Before
> switching the driver infrastructure to those new bindings, implement
> backward-compatibility through live DT patching.
>
> Patching is disabled and will be enabled along with support for the new
> DT bindings in the DU driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart <[email protected]>
Thanks for your patch!
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/Kconfig
> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ config DRM_RCAR_LVDS
> bool "R-Car DU LVDS Encoder Support"
> depends on DRM_RCAR_DU
> select DRM_PANEL
> + select OF_OVERLAY
select OF_FLATTREE for of_fdt_unflatten_tree()
(you can probably check with sparc all*config)
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/rcar_du_of.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,440 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
-ENOENT in Documentation/process/license-rules.rst ;-)
> +extern u8 __dtb_rcar_du_of_lvds_begin[];
> +extern u8 __dtb_rcar_du_of_lvds_end[];
Typically sections are declared using char, not u8.
> +static int __init rcar_du_of_get_overlay(struct rcar_du_of_overlay *overlay,
> + u8 *begin, u8 *end)
"void *begin, void *end" sounds more natural to me.
> +static void __init rcar_du_of_lvds_patch_one(struct device_node *du,
> + unsigned int port_id,
> + const struct resource *res,
> + const __be32 *reg,
> + const struct of_phandle_args
> *clkspec,
> + struct device_node *local,
> + struct device_node *remote)
> +{
> +
> + /* Skip if the LVDS node already exists. */
> + sprintf(name, "lvds@%llx", (u64)res->start);
I guess you cannot use %pa because you don't want a 0x prefix?
> + /*
> + * Patch the LVDS and DU port nodes names and the associated fixup
> + * entries.
> + */
> + lvds = rcar_du_of_find_node_by_path(overlay.np,
> + "/fragment@0/__overlay__/lvds");
> + lvds_endpoints[0] = rcar_du_of_find_node_by_path(overlay.np,
> + "/fragment@0/__overlay__/lvds/ports/port@0/endpoint");
> + lvds_endpoints[1] = rcar_du_of_find_node_by_path(overlay.np,
> + "/fragment@0/__overlay__/lvds/ports/port@1/endpoint");
> + du_port = rcar_du_of_find_node_by_path(overlay.np,
> + "/fragment@1/__overlay__/ports/port@0");
> + du_port_fixup = rcar_du_of_find_node_by_path(overlay.np,
> + "/__local_fixups__/fragment@1/__overlay__/ports/port@0");
Many strings with similar prefixes or substrings?
Would it make sense to e.g. locate "/fragment@0/__overlay__/lvds/ports"
first, and continue from there?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
