[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55DC383F.4000103@rock-chips.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 17:41:19 +0800
From: Yakir Yang <ykk@...k-chips.com>
To: Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>,
Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@...escale.com>,
Inki Dae <inki.dae@...sung.com>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Sean Paul <seanpaul@...gle.com>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>,
Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@...labora.co.uk>,
"linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
Vincent Palatin <vpalatin@...omium.org>,
linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Doug Anderson <dianders@...gle.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Mark Yao <mark.yao@...k-chips.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@...gle.com>,
Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
Ajay kumar <ajaynumb@...il.com>,
Andy Yan <andy.yan@...k-chips.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/14] Documentation: drm/bridge: add document for
analogix_dp
Hi Thierry,
在 2015/8/25 17:12, Thierry Reding 写道:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 09:48:27AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 7:57 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
>> <linux@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 06:23:14PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Yakir Yang <ykk@...k-chips.com> wrote:
>>>>> + -analogix,color-depth:
>>>>> + number of bits per colour component.
>>>>> + COLOR_6 = 0, COLOR_8 = 1, COLOR_10 = 2, COLOR_12 = 3
>>>> This seems pretty generic. Just use 6, 8, 10, or 12 for values. And
>>>> drop the vendor prefix.
>>> Please think about this some more. What does "color-depth" mean? Does it
>>> mean the number of bits per colour _component_, or does it mean the total
>>> number of bits to represent a particular colour. It's confusing as it
>>> stands.
>> Then "component-color-bpp" perhaps?
> There should be no need to have this in DT at all. The BPC is a property
> of the attached panel and it should come from the panel (either the
> panel driver or parsed from EDID if available).
Actually I have send an email about this one to you in version 2, just
past from that email:
"samsung,color_space" and "samsung,color-depth"
The drm_display_info's color_formats and bpc indicate the monitor
display ability, but
the edp driver could not take it as input video format directly.
For example, with my DP TV I would found "RGB444 & YCRCB422 & & YCRCB444"
support in drm_display_info.color_formats and 16bit bpc support, but
RK3288 crtc
driver could only output RGB & ITU formats, so finally
analogix_dp-rockchip driver
config crtc to RGBaaa 10bpc mode.
In this sutiation, the analogix_dp core driver would pazzled by the
drm_display_info,
can't chose the right color_space and bpc.
And this is the place that confused me, wish you could give some ideas
about this one :-)
- Yakir
>>> When we adopted the graph bindings for iMX DRM, I thought exactly at that
>>> time "it would be nice if this could become the standard for binding DRM
>>> components together" but I don't have the authority from either the DT
>>> perspective or the DRM perspective to mandate that. Neither does anyone
>>> else. That's the _real_ problem here.
>>>
>>> I've seen several DRM bindings go by which don't use the of-graph stuff,
>>> which means that they'll never be compatible with generic components
>>> which do use the of-graph stuff.
>> It goes beyond bindings IMO. The use of the component framework or not
>> has been at the whim of driver writers as well. It is either used or
>> private APIs are created. I'm using components and my need for it
>> boils down to passing the struct drm_device pointer to the encoder.
>> Other components like panels and bridges have different ways to attach
>> to the DRM driver.
> I certainly support unification, but it needs to be reasonable. There
> are cases where a different structure for the binding work better than
> another and I think this always needs to be evaluated on a case by case
> basis.
>
> Because of that I think it makes sense to make all these framework bits
> opt-in, otherwise we could easily end up in a situation where drivers
> have to be rearchitected (or even DT bindings altered!) in order to be
> able to reuse code.
>
> Thierry
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists