[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7256zmyip7iaenbrcfvggnrsh7qvg7tcbfgr7htywpxqkhnggp@2jlfcqn7oaxb>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2025 14:41:56 +0200
From: Ernest Van Hoecke <ernestvanhoecke@...il.com>
To: Jayesh Choudhary <j-choudhary@...com>
Cc: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>, andrzej.hajda@...el.com,
neil.armstrong@...aro.org, rfoss@...nel.org, Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, tomi.valkeinen@...asonboard.com, max.krummenacher@...adex.com,
jonas@...boo.se, jernej.skrabec@...il.com, maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com,
mripard@...nel.org, tzimmermann@...e.de, airlied@...il.com, simona@...ll.ch,
kieran.bingham+renesas@...asonboard.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, max.oss.09@...il.com,
devarsht@...com, dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com, ernest.vanhoecke@...adex.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Add HPD for DisplayPort
connector type
Hi Jayesh,
On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 05:48:56PM +0530, Jayesh Choudhary wrote:
> As per the bindings, I see that we should have "no-hpd" property in
> the device description for platforms with bad HPD or disconnected HPD.
>
> Then we can read it in ti_sn65dsi86_probe() before resume call and use
> it as a conditional instead.
> Since I do not have any "bad HPD signal" board, I would need some
> help validating this on such boards from Ernest.
This sounds like a good approach to me, during my investigation I also
thought the "no-hpd" property should enter into the story.
I will gladly help with testing and will add a jumper to my board so I
can turn it into a bad/good HPD signal board.
Thanks for the efforts and kind regards,
Ernest
Powered by blists - more mailing lists