On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Stephen Warren <swar...@wwwdotorg.org> wrote: > n 02/05/2013 04:42 PM, Sean Paul wrote: >> Use the compatible string in the device tree to determine which >> registers/functions to use in the HDMI driver. Also changes the >> references from v13 to 4210 and v14 to 4212 to reflect the IP >> block version instead of the HDMI version. > >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/exynos/hdmi.txt >> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/exynos/hdmi.txt > > Binding looks sane to me. > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_hdmi.c >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_hdmi.c > >> #ifdef CONFIG_OF >> static struct of_device_id hdmi_match_types[] = { >> { >> - .compatible = "samsung,exynos5-hdmi", >> - .data = (void *)HDMI_TYPE14, >> + .compatible = "samsung,exynos4-hdmi", >> }, { >> /* end node */ >> } > > Why not fill in all the "base" compatible values there (I think you need > this anyway so that DTs don't all have to be compatible with > samsung,exynos4-hdmi), with .data containing the HDMI_VER_EXYNOS* > values, then ... >
At the moment, all DTs have to be compatible with exynos4-hdmi since it provides the base for the current driver. The driver uses 4210 and 4212 to differentiate between different register addresses and features, but most things are just exynos4-hdmi compatible. >> @@ -2218,17 +2217,18 @@ static int hdmi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >> + >> + if (of_device_is_compatible(dev->of_node, "samsung,exynos4210-hdmi")) >> + hdata->version |= HDMI_VER_EXYNOS4210; >> + if (of_device_is_compatible(dev->of_node, "samsung,exynos4212-hdmi")) >> + hdata->version |= HDMI_VER_EXYNOS4212; >> + if (of_device_is_compatible(dev->of_node, "samsung,exynos5250-hdmi")) >> + hdata->version |= HDMI_VER_EXYNOS5250; > > Instead of that, do roughly: > > match = of_match_device(hdmi_match_types, &pdev->dev); > if (match) > hdata->version |= (int)match->data; > > That way, it's all table-based. Any future additions to > hdmi_match_types[] won't require another if statement to be added to > probe(). I don't think it's that easy. of_match_device returns the first match from the device table, so I'd still need to iterate through the matches. I could still break this out into a table, but I don't think of_match_device is the right way to probe it. Sean -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/