On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 12:27:14AM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote:
On 2024/4/30 22:13, Andy Shevchenko wrote:...
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 05:13:43AM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote:
True.the former might be subdivided to "is it swnode backed or real fwnode one?"Yeah,
On non-DT cases, it can be subdivided to swnode backed case and ACPI fwnode backed case.
- For swnode backed case: the device_get_match_data() don't has a implemented backend.
- For ACPI fwnode backed case: the device_get_match_data() has a implemented backend.
But the driver has *neither* software node support
nor ACPI support,Not true.
So, slow down and take your time to get into the code and understand how it works.
so that the rotation property can not get and ili9341_dpi_probe() will fails.
So in total, this is not a 100% correct use of device property APIs.
But I'm fine that if you want to leave(ignore) those less frequent use cases temporarily,
there may have programmers want to post patches, to complete the missing in the future.
So, there do have some gains on non-DT cases.
- As you make it be able to compiled on X86 with the drm-misc-defconfig.
- You cleanup the code up (at least patch 2 in this series is no obvious problem).
- You allow people to modprobe it, and maybe half right and half undefined.
But you do helps moving something forward, so congratulations for the wake up.