[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221216113832.6qvyzlrwfzrlhker@pengutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 12:38:32 +0100
From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: display: imx: Describe drm binding
for fsl,imx-lcdc
On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 11:41:30AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 14/12/2022 12:59, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > Modify the existing (fb-like) binding to support the drm-like binding in
> > parallel.
>
> Aren't you now adding two compatibles to the same hardware, just for two
> Linux drivers? One hardware should have one compatible, regardless of
> Linux display implementation.
The (up to now unopposed) idea was to use the opportunity to pick a
better name for the compatible. The hardware component is called LCDC
and I guess fsl,imx21-fb was only picked because the linux driver is
called imxfb. Unless I understood Rob wrong, he insisted to describe
both variants in a single binding document only.
> > +if:
>
> Put it under allOf. It grows pretty often so this would avoid future
> re-indents.
ok.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists