[PATCH 2/2] ARM i.MX23/28: Add framebuffer device support

[Sascha Hauer]

On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 02:14:41PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 10:56:39AM +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer at pengutronix.de>
> > Cc: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo at freescale.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm/mach-mxs/clock-mx23.c             |    2 +-
> >  arch/arm/mach-mxs/clock-mx28.c             |    1 +
> >  arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices-mx23.h           |    4 ++
> >  arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices-mx28.h           |    4 ++
> >  arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/Kconfig          |    4 ++
> >  arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/Makefile         |    1 +
> >  arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/platform-mxsfb.c |   46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  7 files changed, 61 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >  create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/platform-mxsfb.c
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/clock-mx23.c b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/clock-mx23.c
> > index ca72a05..bfc7f27 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/clock-mx23.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/clock-mx23.c
> > @@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ static struct clk_lookup lookups[] = {
> >  	_REGISTER_CLOCK(NULL, "hclk", hbus_clk)
> >  	_REGISTER_CLOCK(NULL, "usb", usb_clk)
> >  	_REGISTER_CLOCK(NULL, "audio", audio_clk)
> > -	_REGISTER_CLOCK(NULL, "pwm", pwm_clk)
> Introducing the warning below ...
> 
> arch/arm/mach-mxs/clock-mx23.c:430: warning: ‘pwm_clk’ defined but not used

Right, it was not intended to remove the pwm here. Will fix.

> 
> > +	_REGISTER_CLOCK("imx23-fb", NULL, lcdif_clk)
> >  };
> >  
> >  static int clk_misc_init(void)
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/clock-mx28.c b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/clock-mx28.c
> > index fd1c4c5..6a7ebcb 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/clock-mx28.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/clock-mx28.c
> > @@ -620,6 +620,7 @@ static struct clk_lookup lookups[] = {
> >  	_REGISTER_CLOCK(NULL, "pwm", pwm_clk)
> >  	_REGISTER_CLOCK(NULL, "lradc", lradc_clk)
> >  	_REGISTER_CLOCK(NULL, "spdif", spdif_clk)
> > +	_REGISTER_CLOCK("imx28-fb", NULL, lcdif_clk)
> >  };
> >  
> >  static int clk_misc_init(void)
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices-mx23.h b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices-mx23.h
> > index 1256788..b9745a2 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices-mx23.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices-mx23.h
> > @@ -10,7 +10,11 @@
> >   */
> >  #include <mach/mx23.h>
> >  #include <mach/devices-common.h>
> > +#include <mach/fb.h>
> >  
> Why do we have mxsfb platform device code breaking the consistency
> that we are maintaining well so far?

The rule is that we include header files where we need them.
devices-common.h is not touched in this patch and it does not need
mach/fb.h, hence it is not include there.

> 
> Generally, we have this header included in devices-common.h
> 
> >  extern const struct amba_device mx23_duart_device __initconst;
> >  #define mx23_add_duart() \
> >  	mxs_add_duart(&mx23_duart_device)
> > +
> > +struct platform_device *__init mx23_add_mxsfb(
> > +		const struct mxsfb_platform_data *pdata);
> 
> Generally, this goes to devices-common.h

No, devices-common.h only declares the mxs_* functions. There is no
mxs_add_mxsfb in this patch which indeed would go to devices-common.h

> 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices-mx28.h b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices-mx28.h
> > index 33773a6..c902dc7 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices-mx28.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices-mx28.h
> > @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
> >   */
> >  #include <mach/mx28.h>
> >  #include <mach/devices-common.h>
> > +#include <mach/fb.h>
> >  
> >  extern const struct amba_device mx28_duart_device __initconst;
> >  #define mx28_add_duart() \
> > @@ -18,3 +19,6 @@ extern const struct amba_device mx28_duart_device __initconst;
> >  extern const struct mxs_fec_data mx28_fec_data[] __initconst;
> >  #define mx28_add_fec(id, pdata) \
> >  	mxs_add_fec(&mx28_fec_data[id], pdata)
> > +
> > +struct platform_device *__init mx28_add_mxsfb(
> > +		const struct mxsfb_platform_data *pdata);
> 
> ditto
> 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/Kconfig
> > index cf7dc1a..1538cb9 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/Kconfig
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/Kconfig
> > @@ -4,3 +4,7 @@ config MXS_HAVE_AMBA_DUART
> >  
> >  config MXS_HAVE_PLATFORM_FEC
> >  	bool
> > +
> > +config MXS_HAVE_PLATFORM_MXSFB
> > +	bool
> > +
> 
> I understand that "mxsfb" was picked up for the device name to
> reflect the driver name.  But since this is the device under mach- mxs
> folder, can we simply call it "fb" just like the way you name fb.h?
> 
> In this way, we have all mxs platform device naming schema aligned,
> auart, duart, dma, fb, fec, flexcan, mmc ...

I see it the other way round. mach/fb.h is too generic, I would prefer
mach/mxsfb.h to be able to add support for a different framebuffer
later. So I better change fb.h to mxsfb.h.

> 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/Makefile
> > index d0a09f6..0cf8b48 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/Makefile
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/Makefile
> > @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@
> >  obj-$(CONFIG_MXS_HAVE_AMBA_DUART) += amba-duart.o
> >  obj-$(CONFIG_MXS_HAVE_PLATFORM_FEC) += platform-fec.o
> > +obj-$(CONFIG_MXS_HAVE_PLATFORM_MXSFB) += platform-mxsfb.o
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/platform-mxsfb.c b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/platform-mxsfb.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..632bbdc
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/platform-mxsfb.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
> > +/*
> > + * Copyright (C) 2011 Pengutronix, Sascha Hauer <s.hauer at pengutronix.de>
> > + *
> > + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under
> > + * the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as published by the
> > + * Free Software Foundation.
> > + */
> > +#include <asm/sizes.h>
> > +#include <mach/mx23.h>
> > +#include <mach/mx28.h>
> > +#include <mach/devices-common.h>
> > +#include <mach/fb.h>
> 
> Generally, this goes to devices-common.h
> 
> > +
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SOC_IMX23
> > +struct platform_device *__init mx23_add_mxsfb(
> > +		const struct mxsfb_platform_data *pdata)
> > +{
> > +	struct resource res[] = {
> > +		{
> > +			.start = MX23_LCDIF_BASE_ADDR,
> > +			.end = MX23_LCDIF_BASE_ADDR + SZ_8K - 1,
> > +			.flags = IORESOURCE_MEM,
> > +		},
> > +	};
> > +
> > +	return mxs_add_platform_device_dmamask("imx23-fb", -1,
> > +			res, ARRAY_SIZE(res), pdata, sizeof(*pdata), DMA_BIT_MASK(32));
> > +}
> > +#endif /* ifdef CONFIG_SOC_IMX23 */
> > +
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SOC_IMX28
> > +struct platform_device *__init mx28_add_mxsfb(
> > +		const struct mxsfb_platform_data *pdata)
> > +{
> > +	struct resource res[] = {
> > +		{
> > +			.start = MX28_LCDIF_BASE_ADDR,
> > +			.end = MX28_LCDIF_BASE_ADDR + SZ_8K - 1,
> > +			.flags = IORESOURCE_MEM,
> > +		},
> > +	};
> > +
> > +	return mxs_add_platform_device_dmamask("imx28-fb", -1,
> > +			res, ARRAY_SIZE(res), pdata, sizeof(*pdata), DMA_BIT_MASK(32));
> > +}
> > +#endif /* ifdef CONFIG_SOC_IMX28 */
> 
> Generally, we have macro mxs_fb_data_entry and function mxs_add_fb
> in this file.  It's nothing but all about consistency.  We do not
> want some later coming platform device looking at this as example,
> and bring more inconsistency into mach-mxs platform device codes.

My opinion on this is that we should not use complex ## macro constructs
where not necessary. With a device which is only present once on the SoC
it is not necessary, so I skippped it. And yes, if someone is in the
same situation with a single device on a system, he actually should take
this as an example. So no, I don't agree with you.

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |