[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YSpK3wTUdqlUyJxb@yoga>
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2021 09:40:31 -0500
From: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>, Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Abhinav Kumar <abhinavk@...eaurora.org>,
Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
Kuogee Hsieh <khsieh@...eaurora.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Vara Reddy <varar@...eaurora.org>,
freedreno <freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Chandan Uddaraju <chandanu@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] drm/msm/dp: Allow attaching a drm_panel
On Fri 27 Aug 15:52 CDT 2021, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 4:15 PM Bjorn Andersson
> <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org> wrote:
> >
> > +static int dp_parser_find_panel(struct dp_parser *parser)
> > +{
> > + struct device_node *np = parser->pdev->dev.of_node;
> > + int rc;
> > +
> > + rc = drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge(np, 2, 0, &parser->drm_panel, NULL);
>
> Why port 2? Shouldn't this just be port 1 always? The yaml says that
> port 1 is "Output endpoint of the controller". We should just use port
> 1 here, right?
>
I thought port 1 was the link to the Type-C controller, didn't give it a
second thought and took the next available.
But per the binding it makes sense that the panel is the "Output
endpoint of the controller" and I guess one will have either a Type-C
controller or a panel - even after the DP rework?
Regards,
Bjorn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists