[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e71e9254-07e3-a6d6-00db-ac42325f6138@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 12:41:19 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
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 16/12/2022 12:38, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> 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.
OK, I'll leave it then to Rob.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists