[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 12:24:33AM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > However, we (as in the V4L2 community, and me personally) would have > appreciated to be CC'ed on the proposal. As you might know we already had a > solution for this problem, albeit V4L2-specific, in drivers/media/v4l2- >

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

Hi Russell, (CC'ing Philipp Zabel who might be able to provide feedback as a user of the component framework) Could you please have a look at the questions below and provide an answer when you'll have time ? I'd like to bridge the gap between the component and the V4L2 asynchronous

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 06:22:14PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Russell, > > (CC'ing Philipp Zabel who might be able to provide feedback as a user of the > component framework) > > Could you please have a look at the questions below and provide an answer > when > you'll have time ? I'd

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

Hi Russell, Time for me to jump in. The more, the merrier I suppose. On Wednesday 26 February 2014 22:19:39 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 10:00:25PM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > Hi Russell > > > > (I suspect this my email will be rejected by ALKML too like

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

Hi Russell, Sorry for a long delay. On Wed, 26 Feb 2014, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: [snip] > Better bindings for imx-drm are currently being worked on. Philipp > Zabel of Pengutronix is currently looking at it, and has posted many > RFC patches on this very subject, including moving the

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 10:00:25PM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > Hi Russell > > (I suspect this my email will be rejected by ALKML too like other my > recent emails, but at least other MLs will pick it up and individual CCs > too, so, if replying, maybe it would be good to keep my

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

Hi Russell (I suspect this my email will be rejected by ALKML too like other my recent emails, but at least other MLs will pick it up and individual CCs too, so, if replying, maybe it would be good to keep my entire reply, all the more that it's going to be very short) On Thu, 2 Jan 2014,

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Fri, 7 Feb 2014 09:46:56 + Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 10:04:30AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > I've chatted a bit with Hans Verkuil about this topic at fosdem and > > apparently both v4l and alsa have something like this already in their > > helper

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 12:57:21PM +0100, Jean-Francois Moine wrote: > I started to use your code (which works fine, thanks), and it avoids a > lot of problems, especially, about probe_defer in a DT context. > > I was wondering if your componentised mechanism could be extended to the > devices

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

I've chatted a bit with Hans Verkuil about this topic at fosdem and apparently both v4l and alsa have something like this already in their helper libraries. Adding more people as fyi in case they want to switch to the new driver core stuff from Russell. -Daniel On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:27 PM,

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 10:04:30AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > I've chatted a bit with Hans Verkuil about this topic at fosdem and > apparently both v4l and alsa have something like this already in their > helper libraries. Adding more people as fyi in case they want to > switch to the new

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

Am Samstag, den 11.01.2014, 11:40 + schrieb Russell King - ARM Linux: > On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Robert Schwebel wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 11:23:37PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > We do this in DT by providing a "superdevice" node which specifies > > >

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 11:23:37PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > We do this in DT by providing a "superdevice" node which specifies > the components, eg: > > imx-drm { > compatible = "fsl,drm"; > crtcs = <>; > connectors = <>; > };

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Robert Schwebel wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 11:23:37PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > We do this in DT by providing a "superdevice" node which specifies > > the components, eg: > > > > imx-drm { > > compatible = "fsl,drm";

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:42:59PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 07:30:21PM +0100, Robert Schwebel wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 07:35:30AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > I'll sort out a new set of patches today, along with a branch to pull if > > > >

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 07:35:30AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > I'll sort out a new set of patches today, along with a branch to pull if > > you wish to take them that way. > > It's too late for 3.14, as my tree is now closed for that because 3.13 > should be out this weekend. But I'll

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 07:35:30AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 03:11:23PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 07:07:02AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 02:54:44PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 07:07:02AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 02:54:44PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > Greg, > > > > Not sure if you saw the outcome to your comment above. My conclusion > > was: > > > > "Yes, I'm coming to that conclusion as well.

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 07:10:55PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 09:27:58PM +, Russell King wrote: > > Subsystems such as ALSA, DRM and others require a single card-level > > device structure to represent a subsystem. However, firmware tends to > > describe the

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 07:30:21PM +0100, Robert Schwebel wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 07:35:30AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > I'll sort out a new set of patches today, along with a branch to pull if > > > you wish to take them that way. > > > > It's too late for 3.14, as my tree is

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 03:11:23PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 07:07:02AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 02:54:44PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > Greg, > > > > > > Not sure if you saw the outcome to your comment

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 02:54:44PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 07:10:55PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 09:27:58PM +, Russell King wrote: > > > Subsystems such as ALSA, DRM and others require a single card-level > > > device

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 05:39:31PM -0500, Sean Paul wrote: > On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux > > Which bits do you think would be useful to move into the core? > > imx_drm_add_components() is rather imx-drm specific, especially for > > the CRTCs - it carries the knowledge

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 03:18:21PM -0500, Sean Paul wrote: > On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Russell King > wrote: > > Subsystems such as ALSA, DRM and others require a single card-level > > device structure to represent a subsystem. However, firmware tends to > >

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 03:18:21PM -0500, Sean Paul wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Russell King >> wrote: >> > Subsystems such as ALSA, DRM and others require a single card-level >> >

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Russell King wrote: > Subsystems such as ALSA, DRM and others require a single card-level > device structure to represent a subsystem. However, firmware tends to > describe the individual devices and the connections between them. >

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Friday, January 03, 2014 12:18:13 PM Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 12:58:16PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Friday, January 03, 2014 11:00:30 AM Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 07:10:55PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > >

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 02:24:26PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, January 03, 2014 12:18:13 PM Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > I'm not sure what I'm looking for. I've tried looking at the results of > > searching your linux-next branch for "container" but I don't see > >

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Friday, January 03, 2014 11:00:30 AM Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 07:10:55PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 09:27:58PM +, Russell King wrote: > > > Subsystems such as ALSA, DRM and others require a single card-level > > > device

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 12:58:16PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, January 03, 2014 11:00:30 AM Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 07:10:55PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 09:27:58PM +, Russell King wrote: > > > >

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 07:10:55PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 09:27:58PM +, Russell King wrote: > > Subsystems such as ALSA, DRM and others require a single card-level > > device structure to represent a subsystem. However, firmware tends to > > describe the

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

Subsystems such as ALSA, DRM and others require a single card-level device structure to represent a subsystem. However, firmware tends to describe the individual devices and the connections between them. Therefore, we need a way to gather up the individual component devices together, and

[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 09:27:58PM +, Russell King wrote: > Subsystems such as ALSA, DRM and others require a single card-level > device structure to represent a subsystem. However, firmware tends to > describe the individual devices and the connections between them. > > Therefore, we need a