[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9a0245af-b7f3-0874-385b-47c86d6e6a60@linaro.org>
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2023 15:49:36 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, andersson@...nel.org,
agross@...nel.org
Cc: marijn.suijten@...ainline.org, Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>,
Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com>,
Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Krishna Manikandan <quic_mkrishn@...cinc.com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: display/msm: dsi-controller-main: Fix
deprecated QCM2290 compatible
On 18/02/2023 12:23, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>
>
> On 18.02.2023 11:14, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 17/02/2023 22:13, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
>>> On 17/02/2023 12:24, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> First, it would be nice to know what was the intention of Bryan's commit?
>>>
>>> Sorry I've been grazing this thread but, not responding.
>>>
>>> - qcom,dsi-ctrl-6g-qcm2290
>>>
>>> is non-compliant with qcom,socid-dsi-ctrl which is our desired naming
>>> convention, so that's what the deprecation is about i.e. moving this
>>> compat to "qcom,qcm2290-dsi-ctrl"
>>
>> OK, then there was no intention to deprecate qcom,mdss-dsi-ctrl and it
>> should be left as allowed compatible.
> Not sure if we're on the same page.
We are.
>
> It wasn't intended to deprecate [1] "qcom,qcm2290-dsi-ctrl", "qcom-mdss-dsi-ctrl";
> (newly-introduced in Bryan's cleanup patchset) but it was intended to deprecate
> [2] "qcom,dsi-ctrl-6g-qcm2290"; which was introduced long before that *and* used in
> the 6115 dt (and it still is in linux-next today, as my cleanup hasn't landed yet).
>
> [3] "qcom,dsi-ctrl-6g-qcm2290", "qcom,mdss-dsi-ctrl" was never used (and should never
> be, considering there's a proper compatible [1] now) so adding it to bindings
> didn't solve the undocumented-ness issue. Plus the fallback would have never
> worked back then, as the DSI hw revision check would spit out 2.4.1 or 2.4.
> which is SC7180 or SDM845 and then it would never match the base register, as
> they're waay different.
All these were known. I was asking about "qcom,mdss-dsi-ctrl", because
the original intention also affects the way we want to keep it now
(unless there are other reasons).
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists