lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Feb]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] drm/omap: panel-tpo-td028ttec1: add backlight support
Hi,

On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 10:13:46 +0200
Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 19/01/2019 20:21, Andreas Kemnade wrote:
> > This panel has a backlight, so fetch it from devicetree using the
> > as documented in panel-common.txt. It is implemented the same way as in
>
> Extra words above, or maybe some are missing...
>
oops,
This panel has a backlight, so fetch it from devicetree using the properties
as documented in panel-common.txt. It is implemented the same way as in
panel-dpi.c


> > panel-dpi.c
> > This ensures the backlight is also disabled when the display is
> > turned off like when doing xset dpms force off.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>
> > ---
> > .../gpu/drm/omapdrm/displays/panel-tpo-td028ttec1.c | 18 +++++++++++++++---
> > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/displays/panel-tpo-td028ttec1.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/displays/panel-tpo-td028ttec1.c
> > index 7ddc8c574a61..f326ba9dcf62 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/displays/panel-tpo-td028ttec1.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/displays/panel-tpo-td028ttec1.c
> > @@ -35,6 +35,8 @@ struct panel_drv_data {
> >
> > struct videomode vm;
> >
> > + struct backlight_device *backlight;
> > +
> > struct spi_device *spi_dev;
> > };
> >
> > @@ -268,6 +270,8 @@ static int td028ttec1_panel_enable(struct omap_dss_device *dssdev)
> >
> > r |= jbt_ret_write_0(ddata, JBT_REG_DISPLAY_ON);
> >
> > + backlight_enable(ddata->backlight);
> > +
> > dssdev->state = OMAP_DSS_DISPLAY_ACTIVE;
> >
> > transfer_err:
> > @@ -283,6 +287,8 @@ static void td028ttec1_panel_disable(struct omap_dss_device *dssdev)
> > if (!omapdss_device_is_enabled(dssdev))
> > return;
> >
> > + backlight_disable(ddata->backlight);
> > +
> > dev_dbg(dssdev->dev, "td028ttec1_panel_disable()\n");
> >
> > jbt_ret_write_0(ddata, JBT_REG_DISPLAY_OFF);
> > @@ -321,6 +327,15 @@ static int td028ttec1_panel_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> >
> > dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "%s\n", __func__);
> >
> > + ddata = devm_kzalloc(&spi->dev, sizeof(*ddata), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (ddata == NULL)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > + ddata->backlight = devm_of_find_backlight(&spi->dev);
> > +
> > + if (IS_ERR(ddata->backlight))
> > + return PTR_ERR(ddata->backlight);
> > +
>
> Is there a reason for moving the ddata alloc here, instead of keeping it
> where it was?
>
Well, I was just unsure if the spi_setup needs to be undone on error, so I
moved things around. But the kzalloc() error check would face the same problem
and other error checks further on, too.

So I can rather keep it as is.

I will send a v2.

Regards,
Andreas
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-02-04 11:25    [W:0.065 / U:0.084 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site