From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sebastian Reichel Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/29] Remove the omapdrm and omapdss devices from platform code Date: Tue, 9 May 2017 17:05:50 +0200 Message-ID: <20170509150550.bi4bzadesmma6ntp@earth> References: <20170508113303.27521-1-laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1281286959==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "dri-devel" To: Tomi Valkeinen Cc: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Tony Lindgren , Liam Girdwood , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Peter Ujfalusi , Mark Brown , Laurent Pinchart , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org --===============1281286959== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="urc7j5satectib2h" Content-Disposition: inline --urc7j5satectib2h Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 03:10:40PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 08/05/17 14:32, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > Hello, > >=20 > > This patch series is a second, extended version of the code previously = posted > > as "[PATCH/RFC 0/7] Remove the omapdrm device from platform code". >=20 > As this is a long series, I'd like to pick a bunch of patches from this > series already: >=20 > 1-5, 7, 19, 21. I can't reply directly, since I was not subscribed to dri-devel when this was sent, but I also noticed, the incorrect pattern in patch 1: foo =3D devm_ioremap_resource(...) if (!foo) return -ENOMEM; The same pattern is in patch 2, so you may want a PATCHv2 of that one first. Also I have a few more notes: patch 10: I think dsi pin muxing should be done by providing pinmux info via DT. patch 11: There is a typo in the comment "can be told apart" =3D> "can't be told apart". patch 21: As far as I can see dss.h contains an empty #if defined(CONFIG_OMAP2_DSS_DEBUGFS) after the patch. > I didn't test yet, but I think those should not cause conflicts with the > rest of the series. >=20 > I can then push the branch, which contains also the fences and cache > patches, so you can base the rest on that. >=20 > Is this ok? -- Sebastian --urc7j5satectib2h Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEE72YNB0Y/i3JqeVQT2O7X88g7+poFAlkR2swACgkQ2O7X88g7 +pqiHg/+KixkxdpG3v3neFUMtqR9Hd7vUiKOfHqf+Lw5Ksj53cnTzxnfUWbJkW9J LzvJYpEvHuov2H9SeukTm8d3TCr9hdnfobBXwYWbNcbWLPsXvWgewq9Cb77HhZDq 91Kro8u2nQXEkvpThZYCXSOAfUWCR+H4p31jtvQWNysVpqwpI6jKANVoxUbANpjE LpksfFlQ3uh96mepZSkoM6ZHc0nf0Ej3/WBr9q+j+cmEIR1RdesMw4DMbGUhXxu8 UCqK04vCKh+BNnktDou7Y3vcLVsKy8viSb9c5uCB6CWVY5NUTxfWSDeeLzXv8hUY LrUwabrlxZvbJl5qH8BuekV2ivbuuiOc7wW4oXeNPJAj629Qu7DQPSuUFzfvZGlL JAFShIttDTyKbm5+W7vp2BXPR+p6rtZdQrVZFxOtfLJhfaUVUaoFmFGOO+dd5s0d TbdxVQbKX9ubFNfLUTvmNSITNWCyZ2DUGGB0rgg/Gvt7HlkfEP+7rzI7g5nAOK7b uPEM3bYFHk7s4/RprXxicg6F9B9cuFTX1gWMvhLrSbhaMxGkqohGeXGdLuOrOwsV Is8bEExS8i6mh4Qt/igJIiJX1VTrWR8zhQQpQUS2AiEFFosEvqs43zHPetiHXkk8 s2sdf6j23W28laYphHpSDBZNxBTlwbxyWECXBa0zPnvNBkYnSXE= =Pm5t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --urc7j5satectib2h-- --===============1281286959== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KZHJpLWRldmVs IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdApkcmktZGV2ZWxAbGlzdHMuZnJlZWRlc2t0b3Aub3JnCmh0dHBzOi8vbGlz dHMuZnJlZWRlc2t0b3Aub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vZHJpLWRldmVsCg== --===============1281286959==--