Hi, On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 11:37:38AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: > > > > Am 14.12.2016 um 11:25 schrieb Maxime Ripard > > <maxime.rip...@free-electrons.com>: > > > >> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 11:02:33AM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > >>> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 5:16 AM, Icenowy Zheng <icen...@aosc.xyz> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> 14.12.2016, 04:29, "Simon Glass" <s...@chromium.org>: > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>>> On 12 December 2016 at 19:36, Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skra...@siol.net> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> This patch series add support for HDMI output. Support for other, > >>>>> newer, SoCs, which also uses DE2 and same or similar HDMI controller > >>>>> and PHY can be easily added later (A83T/A64/H5/R40). Current driver > >>>>> can also be easily extended with TV out support, just like video > >>>>> driver for older Allwinner SoCs. > >>>>> > >>>>> While driver works, I would like to get few opinions first. > >>>>> - From what I understand, drivers which supports DT are preferred. > >>>>> Would it be better to rewrite this driver to support device tree? > >>>> > >>>> Yes I think so, and in fact it should use driver model also. > >>>> > >>>> The rockchip driver provides a reasonable example of how to split the > >>>> driver up as you suggest below. The VIDEO driver provides the > >>>> top-level video interface, DISPLAY drivers provide display output for > >>>> the video, and you have PANEL as well for receiving the display > >>>> output. VIDCONSOLE works automatically to display text. > >>>> > >>>> I actually took a bit of a look at this a few weeks ago so am happy to > >>>> help with review or discussions. > >>> > >>> Yes, I think go to Driver Model is also valuable, as Allwinner's display > >>> parts > >>> are really in reusable components. > >>> > >>> In addition, Driver Model provides the possibility to use EFI GOP, which > >>> can > >>> be a more standardized replacement of SimpleFB, especially for OSes other > >>> than Linux. (For example, Windows, if we can really get it running ;-) ) > >> > >> We're going to use EFI now? Doesn't EFI mean we have to leave another bit > >> of firmware in memory running under the OS? What about PSCI and ATF on > >> ARMv8? > > > > Until EFI on A64 on U-boot is a real thing, I don't really care to be > > honest. > > How is it not a real thing today?
Sorry, I missed it... But still, the point remains. If it needs the DT and the device model to be enabled and working properly, since that's not a feature that worked before (on the previous SoC), I don't see why we should hold it off. If and when someone is interested, and if and when we have a DT bindings in Linux, then we will take care of this. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
