Upgrade LVGL to v9.2.0 #469
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
alevy
force-pushed
the
lvgl-upgrade
branch
2 times, most recently
from
f295380
to
c6da6b1
Compare
This was referenced Oct 18, 2024
LVGL 9 has a pretty significantly different API.
lschuermann
approved these changes
Oct 20, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR upgrades the LVGL library to version 9.2.0 and adjusts the example lvgl application accordingly.
This is mostly a straightforward port, though there is some cleanup of global variables etc to make the application example slightly more cannonical C using some of the better ergonomics of newer LVGL API.
Most significantly, this PR now elides the process-level conversion of the frame buffer from normal RGB565 to a swapped version for SPI and other busses that swap them (see: https://docs.lvgl.io/master/porting/display.html#swap-endianness). My argument is that including this at the process level is inappropriate and non-portable, instead individual drivers in the kernel should account for swapping bytes if needed.
This is currently not the case for at least the
st77xxdriver, but I have tock/tock#4206 address that.