From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ajay kumar Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 11/12] Documentation: bridge: Add documentation for ps8622 DT properties Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 13:53:38 +0530 Message-ID: References: <1409150399-12534-1-git-send-email-ajaykumar.rs@samsung.com> <5433C0CC.5040804@ti.com> <2230493.RvivJykn5T@avalon> <20141008070918.GA4999@ulmo> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "dri-devel" To: Thierry Reding Cc: "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" , Sean Paul , Daniel Vetter , Jingoo Han , sunil joshi , "dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org" , Tomi Valkeinen , Laurent Pinchart , Prashanth G , Ajay Kumar List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org ping! On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 6:33 PM, Ajay kumar wrote: > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Thierry Reding > wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 05:49:24PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>> Hi Ajay, >>> >>> On Tuesday 07 October 2014 16:06:55 Ajay kumar wrote: >>> > On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: >>> > > On 20/09/14 14:22, Ajay kumar wrote: >>> > >> Well, I am okay with using video ports to describe the relationship >>> > >> between the encoder, bridge and the panel. >>> > >> But, its just that I need to make use of 2 functions when phandle >>> > >> does it using just one function ;) >>> > >> - panel_node = of_parse_phandle(dev->of_node, "panel", 0) >>> > >> + endpoint = of_graph_get_next_endpoint(dev->of_node, NULL); >>> > >> + if (!endpoint) >>> > >> + return -EPROBE_DEFER; >>> > >> + >>> > >> + panel_node = of_graph_get_remote_port_parent(endpoint); >>> > >> + if (!panel_node) >>> > >> + return -EPROBE_DEFER; >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> If nobody else has objections over using of_graph functions instead >>> > >> of phandles, I can respin this patchset by making use of video ports. >>> > > >>> > > The discussion did digress somewhat. >>> > > >>> > > As a clarification, I'm in no way nack'ing this series because it >>> > > doesn't use the graphs for video connections. I don't see the simple >>> > > phandle bindings used here as broken as such. >>> > >>> > Well, I am okay with any approach you guys decide on. I desperately want >>> > this to get this in since it has been floating around for quite sometime. >>> > The more we drag this, the more rework for me since the number of platforms >>> > using bridge support is increasing daily! >>> >>> I won't nack this patch either. I'm however concerned that we'll run straight >>> into the wall if we don't come up with an agreement on a standard way to >>> describe connections in DT for display devices, which is why I would prefer >>> the ps8622 bindings to use OF graph to describe connections. >> >> I think there's not really an easy way out here. It's pretty bold trying >> to come up with a common way to describe bridges when we have only a >> single one (and a single use-case at that). The worst that can happen is >> that we need to change the binding at some point, in which case we may >> have to special-case early drivers, but I really don't think that's as >> much of an issue as everybody seems to think. >> >> This series has been floating around for months because we're being >> overly prudent to accept a binding that /may/ turn out to not be generic >> enough. > Right. It would be great if you guys come to agreement ASAP! > > Ajay