Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755478AbbLGKHx (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2015 05:07:53 -0500 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:17544 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753756AbbLGKHv (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2015 05:07:51 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,394,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="868203763" From: Jani Nikula To: Archit Taneja , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, daniel@ffwll.ch Cc: a.hajda@samsung.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, airlied@linux.ie, treding@nvidia.com, l.stach@pengutronix.de, robh@kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] drm/dsi: Try to match non-DT dsi devices In-Reply-To: <56654EF4.50807@codeaurora.org> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo References: <201511302050.evPZc1zs%fengguang.wu@intel.com> <56651937.1080405@codeaurora.org> <87a8pmzly4.fsf@intel.com> <56654A86.1060602@codeaurora.org> <877fkqzksw.fsf@intel.com> <56654EF4.50807@codeaurora.org> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.20.2+101~gb57168b (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.4.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2015 12:07:46 +0200 Message-ID: <87zixmy3kd.fsf@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1411 Lines: 38 On Mon, 07 Dec 2015, Archit Taneja wrote: > On 12/07/2015 02:40 PM, Jani Nikula wrote: >> On Mon, 07 Dec 2015, Archit Taneja wrote: >>> On 12/07/2015 02:15 PM, Jani Nikula wrote: >>>> On Mon, 07 Dec 2015, Archit Taneja wrote: >>>>> Any suggestions on how to fix this? Is it ok to make DRM_MIPI_DSI >>>>> depend on CONFIG_OF? >>>> >>>> Please don't. >>> >>> Just curious, how did x86 use DSI if the only way to create DSI devices >>> until now was via DT? >> >> Oh, you want the gory details... we use the DSI code as a library for >> abstraction and helpers, without actually creating or registering the >> devices. > > Okay, got it. I'll go with the IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) approach. Thanks, appreciated, so i915 doesn't need to depend on OF. > Humble request: Next time if I share something that doesn't make sense, > please reply with something more than a "Please don't". That just sounds > condescending and doesn't really help me with my cause either. That's a fair request, no need to be humble about it. Apologies. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/