From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751836Ab1GYNDP (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jul 2011 09:03:15 -0400 Received: from earthlight.etchedpixels.co.uk ([81.2.110.250]:52607 "EHLO www.etchedpixels.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751139Ab1GYNDK (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jul 2011 09:03:10 -0400 Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 14:06:10 +0100 From: Alan Cox To: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton Cc: debian-arm@lists.debian.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Wookey Subject: Re: dynamic LCD support for "embedded" systems Message-ID: <20110725140610.47fdda27@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: References: <20110725131701.112e635e@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.9 (GTK+ 2.22.0; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Face: 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 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > DVI monitor), and that EDID data just gets passed-through via the VGA > IC. so it's all the same stuff... so what's the damn difference > between a system with a VGA monitor and a system with the exact same > LCD panel *from* that VGA monitor, ehn? :) ok, rhetorical question. I'm not convinced it is the same stuff for various reaosns and bits of historical bug fixing and observation. > devicetree LCD modules. these could still be dynamically loaded, > right? i mean, it's a bit crazy, but you could have associated with a > particular LCD panel a devicetree-compliant dynamic loaded module > which had the correct LCD settings (including the required pre-tested > hsync and vsync data), right? In theory, or passed to the kernel at boot. The obvious long term path I would have thought would have been to move to 'device tree if data present else...' in the various panel drivers. That way there are no sudden bumps in the road for distributors but a device tree data set from any source would trump the data extracted by other means.