All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Guido Günther" <agx@sigxcpu.org>
To: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
	David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
	Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
	Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>,
	NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
	Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com>,
	Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
	Anson Huang <Anson.Huang@nxp.com>,
	Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@nxp.com>,
	Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>, Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>,
	Robert Chiras <robert.chiras@nxp.com>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] dt-bindings: display/bridge: Add binding for input mux bridge
Date: Sat, 30 May 2020 15:26:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200530132634.GA3337@bogon.m.sigxcpu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200528194804.GA541078@bogus>

Hi Rob,
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 01:48:04PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 03:12:10PM +0200, Guido Günther wrote:
> > The bridge allows to select the input source via a mux controller.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Guido Günther <agx@sigxcpu.org>
> > ---
> >  .../display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml      | 123 ++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 123 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..4029cf63ee5c
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml
> > @@ -0,0 +1,123 @@
> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > +%YAML 1.2
> > +---
> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml#
> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > +
> > +title: DRM input source selection via multiplexer
> 
> DRM is not a hardware thing.

I thought about naming the mux pixel-input-mux (input-mux sounding too
generic) but then i hit rockchip-drm and went for that name.  The
binding itself is not a drm thing in itself it really aims to model how
the mux is placed in the 'display pipeline' of the SoC (as Laurent
explained). Should I go with pixel-input-mux?

> The graph binding is already designed to support muxing. Generally, 
> multiple endpoints on an input node is a mux. So either the device with 
> the input ports knows how to select the input, or you just need a 
> mux-control property for the port to have some other device implement 
> the control.

A mux control property is how it's modeled at the moment but that is
very SoC specific.

> You could do it like you have below. That would be appropriate if 
> there's a separate h/w device controlling the muxing. Say for example 
> some board level device controlled by i2c.

It's a different part of the SoC that lives in a register range very
separate (iomuxc_gpr) from MIPI/DSI (nwl). Does that qualify?

Cheers,
 -- Guido

> 
> Rob
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Guido Günther" <agx@sigxcpu.org>
To: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>,
	Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
	Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
	Anson Huang <Anson.Huang@nxp.com>,
	David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com>,
	Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
	Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>,
	Robert Chiras <robert.chiras@nxp.com>,
	Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@nxp.com>,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] dt-bindings: display/bridge: Add binding for input mux bridge
Date: Sat, 30 May 2020 15:26:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200530132634.GA3337@bogon.m.sigxcpu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200528194804.GA541078@bogus>

Hi Rob,
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 01:48:04PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 03:12:10PM +0200, Guido Günther wrote:
> > The bridge allows to select the input source via a mux controller.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Guido Günther <agx@sigxcpu.org>
> > ---
> >  .../display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml      | 123 ++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 123 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..4029cf63ee5c
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml
> > @@ -0,0 +1,123 @@
> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > +%YAML 1.2
> > +---
> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml#
> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > +
> > +title: DRM input source selection via multiplexer
> 
> DRM is not a hardware thing.

I thought about naming the mux pixel-input-mux (input-mux sounding too
generic) but then i hit rockchip-drm and went for that name.  The
binding itself is not a drm thing in itself it really aims to model how
the mux is placed in the 'display pipeline' of the SoC (as Laurent
explained). Should I go with pixel-input-mux?

> The graph binding is already designed to support muxing. Generally, 
> multiple endpoints on an input node is a mux. So either the device with 
> the input ports knows how to select the input, or you just need a 
> mux-control property for the port to have some other device implement 
> the control.

A mux control property is how it's modeled at the moment but that is
very SoC specific.

> You could do it like you have below. That would be appropriate if 
> there's a separate h/w device controlling the muxing. Say for example 
> some board level device controlled by i2c.

It's a different part of the SoC that lives in a register range very
separate (iomuxc_gpr) from MIPI/DSI (nwl). Does that qualify?

Cheers,
 -- Guido

> 
> Rob
> 

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Guido Günther" <agx@sigxcpu.org>
To: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>,
	Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
	Anson Huang <Anson.Huang@nxp.com>,
	David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com>,
	Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
	Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
	Robert Chiras <robert.chiras@nxp.com>,
	Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@nxp.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] dt-bindings: display/bridge: Add binding for input mux bridge
Date: Sat, 30 May 2020 15:26:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200530132634.GA3337@bogon.m.sigxcpu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200528194804.GA541078@bogus>

Hi Rob,
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 01:48:04PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 03:12:10PM +0200, Guido Günther wrote:
> > The bridge allows to select the input source via a mux controller.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Guido Günther <agx@sigxcpu.org>
> > ---
> >  .../display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml      | 123 ++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 123 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..4029cf63ee5c
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml
> > @@ -0,0 +1,123 @@
> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > +%YAML 1.2
> > +---
> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/display/bridge/mux-input-bridge.yaml#
> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > +
> > +title: DRM input source selection via multiplexer
> 
> DRM is not a hardware thing.

I thought about naming the mux pixel-input-mux (input-mux sounding too
generic) but then i hit rockchip-drm and went for that name.  The
binding itself is not a drm thing in itself it really aims to model how
the mux is placed in the 'display pipeline' of the SoC (as Laurent
explained). Should I go with pixel-input-mux?

> The graph binding is already designed to support muxing. Generally, 
> multiple endpoints on an input node is a mux. So either the device with 
> the input ports knows how to select the input, or you just need a 
> mux-control property for the port to have some other device implement 
> the control.

A mux control property is how it's modeled at the moment but that is
very SoC specific.

> You could do it like you have below. That would be appropriate if 
> there's a separate h/w device controlling the muxing. Say for example 
> some board level device controlled by i2c.

It's a different part of the SoC that lives in a register range very
separate (iomuxc_gpr) from MIPI/DSI (nwl). Does that qualify?

Cheers,
 -- Guido

> 
> Rob
> 
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-05-30 13:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-15 13:12 [RFC PATCH 0/6] drm/bridge: Add mux input selection bridge Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12 ` Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12 ` Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12 ` [RFC PATCH 1/6] dt-bindings: display/bridge: Add binding for input mux bridge Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12   ` Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12   ` Guido Günther
2020-05-28 19:48   ` Rob Herring
2020-05-28 19:48     ` Rob Herring
2020-05-28 19:48     ` Rob Herring
2020-05-28 22:48     ` Laurent Pinchart
2020-05-28 22:48       ` Laurent Pinchart
2020-05-28 22:48       ` Laurent Pinchart
2020-05-30 13:26     ` Guido Günther [this message]
2020-05-30 13:26       ` Guido Günther
2020-05-30 13:26       ` Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] drm/bridge: Add mux-input bridge Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12   ` Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12   ` Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] dt-bindings: display/bridge/nwl-dsi: Drop mux handling Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12   ` Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12   ` Guido Günther
2020-05-28 19:59   ` Rob Herring
2020-05-28 19:59     ` Rob Herring
2020-05-28 19:59     ` Rob Herring
2020-05-29  4:23     ` Guido Günther
2020-05-29  4:23       ` Guido Günther
2020-05-29  4:23       ` Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] drm/bridge/nwl-dsi: " Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12   ` Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12   ` Guido Günther
2020-05-28 19:57   ` Rob Herring
2020-05-28 19:57     ` Rob Herring
2020-05-28 19:57     ` Rob Herring
2020-05-15 13:12 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] arm64: dts: imx8mq: Add NWL dsi controller Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12   ` Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12   ` Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] arm64: dts: imx8mq-librem5-devkit: Enable MIPI DSI panel Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12   ` Guido Günther
2020-05-15 13:12   ` Guido Günther

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200530132634.GA3337@bogon.m.sigxcpu.org \
    --to=agx@sigxcpu.org \
    --cc=Anson.Huang@nxp.com \
    --cc=Laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
    --cc=a.hajda@samsung.com \
    --cc=airlied@linux.ie \
    --cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=festevam@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=l.stach@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=leonard.crestez@nxp.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-imx@nxp.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peng.fan@nxp.com \
    --cc=robert.chiras@nxp.com \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
    --cc=shawnguo@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.