[RFC PATCH v4 3/8] staging: imx-drm: Document updated imx-drm device tree bindings
Russell King - ARM Linux
linux at arm.linux.org.uk
Thu Feb 27 08:43:48 EST 2014
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 03:16:03PM +0200, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> On 27/02/14 13:56, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>
> >> Is there even need for such a master device? You can find all the
> >> connected display devices from any single display device, by just
> >> following the endpoint links.
> >
> > Please read up on what has been discussed over previous years:
> >
> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2013-July/041159.html
>
> Thanks, that was an interesting thread. Too bad I missed it, it was
> during the holiday season. And seems Laurent missed it also, as he
> didn't make any replies.
>
> The thread seemed to go over the very same things that had already been
> discussed with CDF.
That may be - but the problem with CDF solving this problem is that it's
wrong. It's fixing what is in actual fact a *generic* problem in a much
too specific way. To put it another way, it's forcing everyone to fix
the same problem in their own separate ways because no one is willing to
take a step back and look at the larger picture.
We can see that because ASoC has exactly the same problem - it has to
wait until all devices (DMA, CPU DAIs, codecs etc) are present before it
can initialise, just like DRM. Can you re-use the CDF solution for ASoC?
No. Can it be re-used elsewhere in non-display subsystems? No.
Therefore, CDF is yet another implementation specific solution to a
generic problem which can't be re-used.
Yes, I realise that CDF may do other stuff, but because of the above, it's
a broken solution.
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: now at 9.7Mbps down 460kbps up... slowly
improving, and getting towards what was expected from it.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list