[PATCH RFC v2 00/35] Second preview of imx-drm cleanup series

[Philipp Zabel]

Hi Russell,

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux <
linux at arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 04:12:19PM +0100, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> > Am Montag, den 10.02.2014, 12:28 +0000 schrieb Russell King - ARM Linux:
> > > This is the latest revision of my series cleaning up imx-drm and
> > > hopefully getting it ready to be moved out of drivers/staging.
> > > This series is updated to v3.14-rc2.
> > >
> > > Since the last round of patches were posted, the component support
> > > has been merged into mainline, and thus dropped from this series.
> > > Greg has taken the first three patches and merged them into his
> > > linux-next tree - however, I include them here for completness.
> > >
> > > Most of the comments from last time still apply, and I'll look at
> > > incorporating some of the other patches that were posted in the
> > > coming week.
> > >
> > > If I can have some acks for this, I'll start sending some of it to
> > >
> > >
> > > Greg - I'd like to at least get the five or six initial imx-hdmi
> > > patches to Greg and queued up for the next merge window sooner
> > > rather than later, preferably getting most of this ready for that
> > > window too.
> >
> > For the first 9 patches up to (including) "imx-drm: ipu-v3: more
> > clocking fixes":
> > Acked-by: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel at pengutronix.de>
> >
> > As you say, comments about the device tree bindings still apply.
> > I'd prefer if the patches that currently use the crtcs property were
> > reworked to use the v4l2 style device tree bindings before they hit
> > mainline.
>
> I'm trying /not/ to do that much more work on this because there's
> other things that need my attention, like a complete rewrite of the
> SDHCI mess.  I want to get the imx-drm stuff off my plate so I don't
> have to worry about it.
>
> So, I'd really like _all_ these patches to go into mainline for v3.15
>
with the least rework possible so I can spend the next few months
> working on rewriting SDHCI.
>

I'd like all of them to go through, too. If you don't want to have the DT
changes integrated, I'd appreciate if you could have a  look at my
patches on top of your series and possibly append them to your
series or let me synchronize somehow:

http://archive.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20140106.145159.a1d82ba9.en.html

I'll prepare an updated more complete version that should work on the
CarrierOne.
Some feedback would be appreciated so I can improve them in time
for your series' final submission.
The only thing I'd like to avoid is to have a stable v3.15 release with
the old IPU specific bindings widely used due to the newly added
HDMI support.

What I don't want is carrying hundreds of patches across multiple
> kernel versions.
>

No complaints there.

Now, mind explaining what "v4l2 style device tree bindings" means?  I've
> no idea since I'm relatively new to DT.
>

Sorry, I was under the impression that people at the 2013 kernel summit
drm/dt discussion were aware of those bindings and kind of agreed on
(or at least did not oppose) them:

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/video-interfaces.txt

The first patch of the above patchset adds the i.MX6 specific connections
for
the output paths according to this binding:
http://archive.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20140106.145200.24ed4a48.en.html

regards
Philipp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/attachments/20140210/9bfbbe00/attachment-0001.html>