Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] eDP: Support probing eDP panels dynamically instead of hardcoding
From: Doug Anderson
Date: Thu Aug 12 2021 - 12:00:32 EST
On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 2:38 AM Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Doug,
> On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 03:18:03PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > Hi,
> > On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 1:41 PM Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Douglas,
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 02:26:19PM -0700, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> > > > The goal of this patch series is to move away from hardcoding exact
> > > > eDP panels in device tree files. As discussed in the various patches
> > > > in this series (I'm not repeating everything here), most eDP panels
> > > > are 99% probable and we can get that last 1% by allowing two "power
> > > > up" delays to be specified in the device tree file and then using the
> > > > panel ID (found in the EDID) to look up additional power sequencing
> > > > delays for the panel.
> > >
> > > Have you considered a new driver for edp panels?
> > > panel-edp.c?
> > >
> > > There will be some duplicate code from pnale-simple - but the same can
> > > be said by the other panel drivers too.
> > > In the end I think it is better to separate them so we end up with two
> > > less complex panel drivers rather than one do-it-all panel driver.
> > >
> > > I have not looked in detail how this would look like, but my first
> > > impression is that we should split it out.
> > I certainly could, but my argument against it is that really it's the
> > exact same set of eDP panels that would be supported by both drivers.
> The idea was to move all eDP panels to the new driver.
> My hope it that we can make panel-simple handle a more more narrow set
> of panels. eDP capable displays are IMO not simple panels.
Ah! OK, this makes sense. I can work on this, though it might be a
short while before I can. I think moving all eDP panels out of
panel-simple.c to something like panel-simple-edp.c makes sense. It
will be a patch that will be very hard to cherry-pick anywhere since
it will conflict with everything but it should be doable.
> Likewise DSI capable panels could also be pulled out of panel-simple.
At the moment I haven't done much with DSI panels so I might leave
them in panel-simple for now. I'll evaluate to see how nasty it would
be for me to try this.
> This would continue to duplicate some code - but we have a lot of
> duplicated code across the various panels and the best way forward
> would be to implement more helpers that can be used by the drivers.
> Sam - who is trying to recover form the deadly man flu...