Hi Pali, On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 at 09:01, Pali Rohár <p...@kernel.org> wrote: > > Hello! > > On Sunday 23 January 2022 08:54:24 Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Pali, > > > > On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 at 07:57, Pali Rohár <p...@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > On Sunday 23 January 2022 07:36:22 Simon Glass wrote: > > > > Hi Pali, > > > > > > > > On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 at 07:08, Pali Rohár <p...@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > + Maemo > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday 23 January 2022 07:04:03 Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > > Drop this code which uses a header that is about to be deleted. > > > > > > > > > > And what / where is the replacement? > > > > > > > > This is DM_VIDEO. There are quite a few example drivers in > > > > drivers/video - perhaps the mxsfb.c one is a reasonable example. See > > > > the top of video_uclass.c for how frame-buffer allocation works. > > > > > > I have already WIP patches for usage of video-uclass.c but because > > > reviewing of N900 patches is slow, I have not sent them yet. > > > > Who is reviewing them? > > Lokesh is reviewing omap3 and n900 patches. > > > If you send the patches I can review them and > > we can get them applied for this release. > > I have already wrote in other thread I do not want to send too many > patches if I see that review process is slow. And also because I totally > lost the track what was send, what was not and what depends on what. And > I do not want to work on too many things in paralel if I see that it > took half year or more to make patches in acceptable form. > > > > > > > So could you please do NOT remove N900 support? I would really > > > appreciative for reviewing pending patches instead of sending patches > > > with board removal. > > > > This is not a board removal, just dropping a feature. > > ... feature which is essential and without which board is unusable. > > > > > > > Note that there is some issue with video_post_bind(), it throws > > > false-positive error "Video device '%s' cannot allocate frame buffer > > > memory" with "return -ENOSPC". If I remove that "return -ENOSPC" it is > > > working fine. > > > > Do you need U-Boot to allocate the frame buffer. If so, this is likely > > because your driver is not bound before relocation. See the comment > > around that message in the code. > > > > Regards, > > Simon > > I did not spend too much time for investigation. I just saw that > removing that comment and returning makes it fully working.
Sure, but it is indicating a bug, so needs to be figured out. If you read the top of video-uclass.c you can probably see what is going on. Regards, Simon
