lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [May]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: it6251: add bindings for IT6251 LVDS-to-eDP bridge
Hi Richard,

Thank you for the patch.

On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 01:17:31PM +0200, srk@48.io wrote:
> From: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
>
> Add DT bindings for ITE IT6251 LVDS-to-eDP bridge.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Marko <srk@48.io>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
> Cc: Sean Cross <xobs@kosagi.com>
> Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org
> To: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> ---
> .../bindings/display/bridge/ite,it6251.yaml | 97 +++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 97 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/ite,it6251.yaml
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/ite,it6251.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/ite,it6251.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..8daa44a30fa1
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/ite,it6251.yaml
> @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
> +%YAML 1.2
> +---
> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/display/bridge/ite,it6251.yaml#
> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> +
> +title: ITE IT6251 LVDS-to-eDP bridge bindings
> +
> +maintainers:
> + - Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
> + - Richard Marko <srk@48.io>
> +
> +description: |
> + The IT6251 is a high-performance single-chip
> + De-SSC LVDS to DisplayPort converter.
> + Combined with LVDS receiver and DisplayPort Transmitter,
> + the IT6251 supports LVDS input and DisplayPort 1.1a
> + output by conversion function.

You could reflow this to the 80 columns limit. It also sounds like
marketing material copied from the datasheet, with "by conversion
function" likely a bad translation.

> +
> +properties:
> + compatible:
> + const: ite,it6251
> +
> + reg:
> + items:
> + - description: I2C address of the bridge
> + - description: I2C address of the LVDS part
> +
> + reg-names:
> + items:
> + - const: bridge
> + - const: lvds
> +
> + ports:
> + type: object
> +
> + properties:
> + "#address-cells":
> + const: 1
> +
> + "#size-cells":
> + const: 0
> +
> + port@0:
> + type: object
> + description: |
> + Video port for eDP output (typically panel).
> +
> + port@1:
> + type: object
> + description: |
> + Video port for LVDS input.

We traditionally use port 0 for the input and port 1 for the output. I'd
rather do the same here to remain consistent, and allow generic code to
operate on this device.

> +
> + required:
> + - port@0
> + - port@1
> +
> + additionalProperties: false
> +
> + power-supply: true

There are multiple power supplies for the chip, shouldn't we have
multiple properties ? I would also name the properties according to the
supply name.

The chip has an HPD input. I would recommend already documenting an
optional boolean no-hpd property to report when the HPD input is not
connected.

> +
> +required:
> + - compatible
> + - reg
> + - reg-names
> + - power-supply
> + - ports
> +
> +additionalProperties: false
> +
> +examples:
> + - |
> + it6251@5c {
> + compatible = "ite,it6251";
> + reg = <0x5c>, <0x5e>;
> + reg-names = "bridge", "lvds";
> + power-supply = <&reg_display>;
> +
> + ports {
> + #address-cells = <1>;
> + #size-cells = <0>;
> +
> + port@0 {
> + reg = <0>;
> + bridge_out_edp0: endpoint {
> + remote-endpoint = <&panel_in_edp0>;
> + };
> + };
> +
> + port@1 {
> + reg = <1>;
> + bridge_in_lvds0: endpoint {
> + remote-endpoint = <&lvds0_out>;
> + };
> + };
> + };
> + };

--
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-05-09 15:45    [W:0.812 / U:0.168 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site