* [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells @ 2022-03-28 15:29 Krzysztof Kozlowski 2022-03-28 15:52 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2022-03-28 16:43 ` Dmitry Baryshkov 0 siblings, 2 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2022-03-28 15:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rob Clark, Sean Paul, Abhinav Kumar, David Airlie, Daniel Vetter, Rob Herring, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Krishna Manikandan, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, freedreno, devicetree, linux-kernel Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, Vinod Koul The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> --- .../bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml | 7 ------- 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml index 7095ec3c890d..57f238f72326 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml @@ -51,10 +51,6 @@ properties: phy-names: const: dsi - "#address-cells": true - - "#size-cells": true - syscon-sfpb: description: A phandle to mmss_sfpb syscon node (only for DSIv2). $ref: "/schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle" @@ -154,9 +150,6 @@ examples: reg = <0x0ae94000 0x400>; reg-names = "dsi_ctrl"; - #address-cells = <1>; - #size-cells = <0>; - interrupt-parent = <&mdss>; interrupts = <4>; -- 2.32.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells 2022-03-28 15:29 [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2022-03-28 15:52 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2022-03-28 16:43 ` Dmitry Baryshkov 1 sibling, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2022-03-28 15:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krzysztof Kozlowski, Rob Clark, Sean Paul, Abhinav Kumar, David Airlie, Daniel Vetter, Rob Herring, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Krishna Manikandan, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, freedreno, devicetree, linux-kernel Cc: Vinod Koul On 28/03/2022 17:29, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. Eh, actually MIPI DSI is a serial bus, so address/size cells seem right and my patch is not correct. > > Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > --- > .../bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml | 7 ------- > 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml > index 7095ec3c890d..57f238f72326 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml > @@ -51,10 +51,6 @@ properties: > phy-names: > const: dsi > > - "#address-cells": true > - > - "#size-cells": true > - > syscon-sfpb: > description: A phandle to mmss_sfpb syscon node (only for DSIv2). > $ref: "/schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle" > @@ -154,9 +150,6 @@ examples: > reg = <0x0ae94000 0x400>; > reg-names = "dsi_ctrl"; > > - #address-cells = <1>; > - #size-cells = <0>; > - > interrupt-parent = <&mdss>; > interrupts = <4>; > Best regards, Krzysztof ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells 2022-03-28 15:29 [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2022-03-28 16:43 ` Dmitry Baryshkov 2022-03-28 16:43 ` Dmitry Baryshkov 1 sibling, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Dmitry Baryshkov @ 2022-03-28 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Krishna Manikandan, devicetree, David Airlie, linux-arm-msm, Abhinav Kumar, dri-devel, linux-kernel, Rob Herring, Vinod Koul, Krzysztof Kozlowski, freedreno, Sean Paul On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. > > Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> NAK. DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). With the DSI split link it is possible to attach two panels to a single DSI host, so addresses are necessary. > --- > .../bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml | 7 ------- > 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml > index 7095ec3c890d..57f238f72326 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml > @@ -51,10 +51,6 @@ properties: > phy-names: > const: dsi > > - "#address-cells": true > - > - "#size-cells": true > - > syscon-sfpb: > description: A phandle to mmss_sfpb syscon node (only for DSIv2). > $ref: "/schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle" > @@ -154,9 +150,6 @@ examples: > reg = <0x0ae94000 0x400>; > reg-names = "dsi_ctrl"; > > - #address-cells = <1>; > - #size-cells = <0>; > - > interrupt-parent = <&mdss>; > interrupts = <4>; > > -- > 2.32.0 > -- With best wishes Dmitry ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells @ 2022-03-28 16:43 ` Dmitry Baryshkov 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Dmitry Baryshkov @ 2022-03-28 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Rob Clark, Sean Paul, Abhinav Kumar, David Airlie, Daniel Vetter, Rob Herring, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Krishna Manikandan, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, freedreno, devicetree, linux-kernel, Vinod Koul On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. > > Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> NAK. DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). With the DSI split link it is possible to attach two panels to a single DSI host, so addresses are necessary. > --- > .../bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml | 7 ------- > 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml > index 7095ec3c890d..57f238f72326 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml > @@ -51,10 +51,6 @@ properties: > phy-names: > const: dsi > > - "#address-cells": true > - > - "#size-cells": true > - > syscon-sfpb: > description: A phandle to mmss_sfpb syscon node (only for DSIv2). > $ref: "/schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle" > @@ -154,9 +150,6 @@ examples: > reg = <0x0ae94000 0x400>; > reg-names = "dsi_ctrl"; > > - #address-cells = <1>; > - #size-cells = <0>; > - > interrupt-parent = <&mdss>; > interrupts = <4>; > > -- > 2.32.0 > -- With best wishes Dmitry ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells 2022-03-28 16:43 ` Dmitry Baryshkov @ 2022-03-28 17:04 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2022-03-28 17:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dmitry Baryshkov, Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Rob Clark, Sean Paul, Abhinav Kumar, David Airlie, Daniel Vetter, Rob Herring, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Krishna Manikandan, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, freedreno, devicetree, linux-kernel, Vinod Koul On 28/03/2022 18:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. >> >> Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> >> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > > NAK. > DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. > This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). > > With the DSI split link it is possible to attach two panels to a > single DSI host, so addresses are necessary. Yes, I noticed it slightly after I sent the patch. :( Best regards, Krzysztof ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells @ 2022-03-28 17:04 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2022-03-28 17:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dmitry Baryshkov, Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Krishna Manikandan, devicetree, David Airlie, linux-arm-msm, Abhinav Kumar, dri-devel, linux-kernel, Rob Herring, Vinod Koul, Krzysztof Kozlowski, freedreno, Sean Paul On 28/03/2022 18:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. >> >> Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> >> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > > NAK. > DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. > This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). > > With the DSI split link it is possible to attach two panels to a > single DSI host, so addresses are necessary. Yes, I noticed it slightly after I sent the patch. :( Best regards, Krzysztof ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells 2022-03-28 16:43 ` Dmitry Baryshkov @ 2022-03-28 17:16 ` Vinod Koul -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Vinod Koul @ 2022-03-28 17:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dmitry Baryshkov Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, Rob Clark, Sean Paul, Abhinav Kumar, David Airlie, Daniel Vetter, Rob Herring, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Krishna Manikandan, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, freedreno, devicetree, linux-kernel On 28-03-22, 19:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. > > > > Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > > NAK. > DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. > This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). So we should add reg = 0, i will update my dtsi fix > With the DSI split link it is possible to attach two panels to a > single DSI host, so addresses are necessary. > > > --- > > .../bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml | 7 ------- > > 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml > > index 7095ec3c890d..57f238f72326 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml > > @@ -51,10 +51,6 @@ properties: > > phy-names: > > const: dsi > > > > - "#address-cells": true > > - > > - "#size-cells": true > > - > > syscon-sfpb: > > description: A phandle to mmss_sfpb syscon node (only for DSIv2). > > $ref: "/schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle" > > @@ -154,9 +150,6 @@ examples: > > reg = <0x0ae94000 0x400>; > > reg-names = "dsi_ctrl"; > > > > - #address-cells = <1>; > > - #size-cells = <0>; > > - > > interrupt-parent = <&mdss>; > > interrupts = <4>; > > > > -- > > 2.32.0 > > > > > -- > With best wishes > Dmitry -- ~Vinod ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells @ 2022-03-28 17:16 ` Vinod Koul 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Vinod Koul @ 2022-03-28 17:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dmitry Baryshkov Cc: Krishna Manikandan, devicetree, David Airlie, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, Abhinav Kumar, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Rob Herring, Krzysztof Kozlowski, freedreno, Sean Paul, linux-kernel On 28-03-22, 19:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. > > > > Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > > NAK. > DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. > This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). So we should add reg = 0, i will update my dtsi fix > With the DSI split link it is possible to attach two panels to a > single DSI host, so addresses are necessary. > > > --- > > .../bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml | 7 ------- > > 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml > > index 7095ec3c890d..57f238f72326 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dsi-controller-main.yaml > > @@ -51,10 +51,6 @@ properties: > > phy-names: > > const: dsi > > > > - "#address-cells": true > > - > > - "#size-cells": true > > - > > syscon-sfpb: > > description: A phandle to mmss_sfpb syscon node (only for DSIv2). > > $ref: "/schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle" > > @@ -154,9 +150,6 @@ examples: > > reg = <0x0ae94000 0x400>; > > reg-names = "dsi_ctrl"; > > > > - #address-cells = <1>; > > - #size-cells = <0>; > > - > > interrupt-parent = <&mdss>; > > interrupts = <4>; > > > > -- > > 2.32.0 > > > > > -- > With best wishes > Dmitry -- ~Vinod ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells 2022-03-28 17:16 ` Vinod Koul @ 2022-03-28 17:17 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2022-03-28 17:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vinod Koul, Dmitry Baryshkov Cc: Rob Clark, Sean Paul, Abhinav Kumar, David Airlie, Daniel Vetter, Rob Herring, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Krishna Manikandan, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, freedreno, devicetree, linux-kernel On 28/03/2022 19:16, Vinod Koul wrote: > On 28-03-22, 19:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >> On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski >> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: >>> >>> The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. >>> >>> Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> >>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> >> >> NAK. >> DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. >> This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). > > So we should add reg = 0, i will update my dtsi fix > To "ports" node? No. The reg=0 is for children of the bus, so the panels. How to combine both without warnings - ports and panel@0 - I don't know yet... Best regards, Krzysztof ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells @ 2022-03-28 17:17 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2022-03-28 17:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vinod Koul, Dmitry Baryshkov Cc: Krishna Manikandan, devicetree, David Airlie, linux-arm-msm, Abhinav Kumar, dri-devel, linux-kernel, Rob Herring, Krzysztof Kozlowski, freedreno, Sean Paul On 28/03/2022 19:16, Vinod Koul wrote: > On 28-03-22, 19:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >> On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski >> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: >>> >>> The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. >>> >>> Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> >>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> >> >> NAK. >> DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. >> This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). > > So we should add reg = 0, i will update my dtsi fix > To "ports" node? No. The reg=0 is for children of the bus, so the panels. How to combine both without warnings - ports and panel@0 - I don't know yet... Best regards, Krzysztof ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells 2022-03-28 17:17 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2022-03-28 18:21 ` Rob Herring -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Rob Herring @ 2022-03-28 18:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Vinod Koul, Dmitry Baryshkov, Rob Clark, Sean Paul, Abhinav Kumar, David Airlie, Daniel Vetter, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Krishna Manikandan, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, freedreno, devicetree, linux-kernel On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 12:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 28/03/2022 19:16, Vinod Koul wrote: > > On 28-03-22, 19:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > >> On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski > >> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > >>> > >>> The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. > >>> > >>> Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> > >>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > >> > >> NAK. > >> DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. > >> This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. > >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). > > > > So we should add reg = 0, i will update my dtsi fix > > > > To "ports" node? No. The reg=0 is for children of the bus, so the > panels. How to combine both without warnings - ports and panel@0 - I > don't know yet... I don't think that should case a warning. Or at least it's one we turn off. Rob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells @ 2022-03-28 18:21 ` Rob Herring 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Rob Herring @ 2022-03-28 18:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Krishna Manikandan, devicetree, David Airlie, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, Abhinav Kumar, Vinod Koul, Dmitry Baryshkov, Krzysztof Kozlowski, freedreno, Sean Paul, linux-kernel On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 12:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 28/03/2022 19:16, Vinod Koul wrote: > > On 28-03-22, 19:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > >> On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski > >> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > >>> > >>> The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. > >>> > >>> Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> > >>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > >> > >> NAK. > >> DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. > >> This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. > >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). > > > > So we should add reg = 0, i will update my dtsi fix > > > > To "ports" node? No. The reg=0 is for children of the bus, so the > panels. How to combine both without warnings - ports and panel@0 - I > don't know yet... I don't think that should case a warning. Or at least it's one we turn off. Rob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells 2022-03-28 18:21 ` Rob Herring @ 2022-03-29 6:31 ` Vinod Koul -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Vinod Koul @ 2022-03-29 6:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rob Herring Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, Dmitry Baryshkov, Rob Clark, Sean Paul, Abhinav Kumar, David Airlie, Daniel Vetter, Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, freedreno, devicetree, linux-kernel On 28-03-22, 13:21, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 12:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > On 28/03/2022 19:16, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > On 28-03-22, 19:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > >> On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > >> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. > > >>> > > >>> Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > > >> > > >> NAK. > > >> DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. > > >> This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. > > >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). > > > > > > So we should add reg = 0, i will update my dtsi fix > > > > > > > To "ports" node? No. The reg=0 is for children of the bus, so the > > panels. How to combine both without warnings - ports and panel@0 - I > > don't know yet... > > I don't think that should case a warning. Or at least it's one we turn off. Well in this case I think we might need a fix: Here is the example quoted in the binding. We have ports{} and then the two port@0 and port@1 underneath. So it should be okay to drop #address-cells/#size-cells from dsi node but keep in ports node... Thoughts...? dsi@ae94000 { compatible = "qcom,mdss-dsi-ctrl"; reg = <0x0ae94000 0x400>; reg-names = "dsi_ctrl"; #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; interrupt-parent = <&mdss>; interrupts = <4>; clocks = <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_BYTE0_CLK>, <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_BYTE0_INTF_CLK>, <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_PCLK0_CLK>, <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_ESC0_CLK>, <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_AHB_CLK>, <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_AXI_CLK>; clock-names = "byte", "byte_intf", "pixel", "core", "iface", "bus"; phys = <&dsi0_phy>; phy-names = "dsi"; assigned-clocks = <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_BYTE0_CLK_SRC>, <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_PCLK0_CLK_SRC>; assigned-clock-parents = <&dsi_phy 0>, <&dsi_phy 1>; power-domains = <&rpmhpd SC7180_CX>; operating-points-v2 = <&dsi_opp_table>; ports { #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; port@0 { reg = <0>; dsi0_in: endpoint { remote-endpoint = <&dpu_intf1_out>; }; }; port@1 { reg = <1>; dsi0_out: endpoint { remote-endpoint = <&sn65dsi86_in>; data-lanes = <0 1 2 3>; }; }; }; }; > > Rob -- ~Vinod ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells @ 2022-03-29 6:31 ` Vinod Koul 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Vinod Koul @ 2022-03-29 6:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rob Herring Cc: freedreno, devicetree, David Airlie, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, Abhinav Kumar, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Dmitry Baryshkov, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Sean Paul, linux-kernel On 28-03-22, 13:21, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 12:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > On 28/03/2022 19:16, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > On 28-03-22, 19:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > >> On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > >> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. > > >>> > > >>> Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > > >> > > >> NAK. > > >> DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. > > >> This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. > > >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). > > > > > > So we should add reg = 0, i will update my dtsi fix > > > > > > > To "ports" node? No. The reg=0 is for children of the bus, so the > > panels. How to combine both without warnings - ports and panel@0 - I > > don't know yet... > > I don't think that should case a warning. Or at least it's one we turn off. Well in this case I think we might need a fix: Here is the example quoted in the binding. We have ports{} and then the two port@0 and port@1 underneath. So it should be okay to drop #address-cells/#size-cells from dsi node but keep in ports node... Thoughts...? dsi@ae94000 { compatible = "qcom,mdss-dsi-ctrl"; reg = <0x0ae94000 0x400>; reg-names = "dsi_ctrl"; #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; interrupt-parent = <&mdss>; interrupts = <4>; clocks = <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_BYTE0_CLK>, <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_BYTE0_INTF_CLK>, <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_PCLK0_CLK>, <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_ESC0_CLK>, <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_AHB_CLK>, <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_AXI_CLK>; clock-names = "byte", "byte_intf", "pixel", "core", "iface", "bus"; phys = <&dsi0_phy>; phy-names = "dsi"; assigned-clocks = <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_BYTE0_CLK_SRC>, <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_PCLK0_CLK_SRC>; assigned-clock-parents = <&dsi_phy 0>, <&dsi_phy 1>; power-domains = <&rpmhpd SC7180_CX>; operating-points-v2 = <&dsi_opp_table>; ports { #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; port@0 { reg = <0>; dsi0_in: endpoint { remote-endpoint = <&dpu_intf1_out>; }; }; port@1 { reg = <1>; dsi0_out: endpoint { remote-endpoint = <&sn65dsi86_in>; data-lanes = <0 1 2 3>; }; }; }; }; > > Rob -- ~Vinod ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells 2022-03-29 6:31 ` Vinod Koul @ 2022-03-29 15:52 ` Rob Herring -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Rob Herring @ 2022-03-29 15:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vinod Koul Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, Dmitry Baryshkov, Rob Clark, Sean Paul, Abhinav Kumar, David Airlie, Daniel Vetter, Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, freedreno, devicetree, linux-kernel On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 12:01:52PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > On 28-03-22, 13:21, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 12:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > On 28/03/2022 19:16, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > > On 28-03-22, 19:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > > >> On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > >> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. > > > >>> > > > >>> Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > > > >> > > > >> NAK. > > > >> DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. > > > >> This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. > > > >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). > > > > > > > > So we should add reg = 0, i will update my dtsi fix > > > > > > > > > > To "ports" node? No. The reg=0 is for children of the bus, so the > > > panels. How to combine both without warnings - ports and panel@0 - I > > > don't know yet... > > > > I don't think that should case a warning. Or at least it's one we turn off. > > Well in this case I think we might need a fix: > Here is the example quoted in the binding. We have ports{} and then the > two port@0 and port@1 underneath. It's the #address-cells/#size-cells under 'ports' that applies to 'port' nodes. As 'ports' has no address (reg) itself, it doesn't need #address-cells/#size-cells in its parent node. > > So it should be okay to drop #address-cells/#size-cells from dsi node > but keep in ports node... Yes. > Thoughts...? But I thought a panel@0 node was being added? If so then you need to add them back. Rob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells @ 2022-03-29 15:52 ` Rob Herring 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Rob Herring @ 2022-03-29 15:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vinod Koul Cc: freedreno, devicetree, David Airlie, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, Abhinav Kumar, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Dmitry Baryshkov, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Sean Paul, linux-kernel On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 12:01:52PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > On 28-03-22, 13:21, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 12:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > On 28/03/2022 19:16, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > > On 28-03-22, 19:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > > >> On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > >> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. > > > >>> > > > >>> Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > > > >> > > > >> NAK. > > > >> DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. > > > >> This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. > > > >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). > > > > > > > > So we should add reg = 0, i will update my dtsi fix > > > > > > > > > > To "ports" node? No. The reg=0 is for children of the bus, so the > > > panels. How to combine both without warnings - ports and panel@0 - I > > > don't know yet... > > > > I don't think that should case a warning. Or at least it's one we turn off. > > Well in this case I think we might need a fix: > Here is the example quoted in the binding. We have ports{} and then the > two port@0 and port@1 underneath. It's the #address-cells/#size-cells under 'ports' that applies to 'port' nodes. As 'ports' has no address (reg) itself, it doesn't need #address-cells/#size-cells in its parent node. > > So it should be okay to drop #address-cells/#size-cells from dsi node > but keep in ports node... Yes. > Thoughts...? But I thought a panel@0 node was being added? If so then you need to add them back. Rob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells 2022-03-29 15:52 ` Rob Herring @ 2022-03-31 6:05 ` Vinod Koul -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Vinod Koul @ 2022-03-31 6:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rob Herring Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, Dmitry Baryshkov, Rob Clark, Sean Paul, Abhinav Kumar, David Airlie, Daniel Vetter, Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, freedreno, devicetree, linux-kernel On 29-03-22, 10:52, Rob Herring wrote: > On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 12:01:52PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > > On 28-03-22, 13:21, Rob Herring wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 12:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 28/03/2022 19:16, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > > > On 28-03-22, 19:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > > > >> On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > > >> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> > > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > > > > >> > > > > >> NAK. > > > > >> DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. > > > > >> This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. > > > > >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). > > > > > > > > > > So we should add reg = 0, i will update my dtsi fix > > > > > > > > > > > > > To "ports" node? No. The reg=0 is for children of the bus, so the > > > > panels. How to combine both without warnings - ports and panel@0 - I > > > > don't know yet... > > > > > > I don't think that should case a warning. Or at least it's one we turn off. > > > > Well in this case I think we might need a fix: > > Here is the example quoted in the binding. We have ports{} and then the > > two port@0 and port@1 underneath. > > It's the #address-cells/#size-cells under 'ports' that applies to 'port' > nodes. As 'ports' has no address (reg) itself, it doesn't need > #address-cells/#size-cells in its parent node. > > > > > So it should be okay to drop #address-cells/#size-cells from dsi node > > but keep in ports node... > > Yes. > > > Thoughts...? > > But I thought a panel@0 node was being added? If so then you need to add > them back. I guess we should make this optional, keep it when adding panel@0 node and skip for rest where not applicable..? Dmitry is that fine with you? -- ~Vinod ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells @ 2022-03-31 6:05 ` Vinod Koul 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Vinod Koul @ 2022-03-31 6:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rob Herring Cc: freedreno, devicetree, David Airlie, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, Abhinav Kumar, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Dmitry Baryshkov, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Sean Paul, linux-kernel On 29-03-22, 10:52, Rob Herring wrote: > On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 12:01:52PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > > On 28-03-22, 13:21, Rob Herring wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 12:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 28/03/2022 19:16, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > > > On 28-03-22, 19:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > > > >> On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > > >> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> > > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > > > > >> > > > > >> NAK. > > > > >> DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. > > > > >> This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. > > > > >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). > > > > > > > > > > So we should add reg = 0, i will update my dtsi fix > > > > > > > > > > > > > To "ports" node? No. The reg=0 is for children of the bus, so the > > > > panels. How to combine both without warnings - ports and panel@0 - I > > > > don't know yet... > > > > > > I don't think that should case a warning. Or at least it's one we turn off. > > > > Well in this case I think we might need a fix: > > Here is the example quoted in the binding. We have ports{} and then the > > two port@0 and port@1 underneath. > > It's the #address-cells/#size-cells under 'ports' that applies to 'port' > nodes. As 'ports' has no address (reg) itself, it doesn't need > #address-cells/#size-cells in its parent node. > > > > > So it should be okay to drop #address-cells/#size-cells from dsi node > > but keep in ports node... > > Yes. > > > Thoughts...? > > But I thought a panel@0 node was being added? If so then you need to add > them back. I guess we should make this optional, keep it when adding panel@0 node and skip for rest where not applicable..? Dmitry is that fine with you? -- ~Vinod ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells 2022-03-31 6:05 ` Vinod Koul @ 2022-03-31 9:34 ` Dmitry Baryshkov -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Dmitry Baryshkov @ 2022-03-31 9:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vinod Koul Cc: Rob Herring, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Rob Clark, Sean Paul, Abhinav Kumar, David Airlie, Daniel Vetter, Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, freedreno, devicetree, linux-kernel On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 at 09:05, Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> wrote: > > On 29-03-22, 10:52, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 12:01:52PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > On 28-03-22, 13:21, Rob Herring wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 12:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On 28/03/2022 19:16, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > > > > On 28-03-22, 19:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > > > > >> On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > > > >> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> > > > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> NAK. > > > > > >> DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. > > > > > >> This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. > > > > > >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). > > > > > > > > > > > > So we should add reg = 0, i will update my dtsi fix > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To "ports" node? No. The reg=0 is for children of the bus, so the > > > > > panels. How to combine both without warnings - ports and panel@0 - I > > > > > don't know yet... > > > > > > > > I don't think that should case a warning. Or at least it's one we turn off. > > > > > > Well in this case I think we might need a fix: > > > Here is the example quoted in the binding. We have ports{} and then the > > > two port@0 and port@1 underneath. > > > > It's the #address-cells/#size-cells under 'ports' that applies to 'port' > > nodes. As 'ports' has no address (reg) itself, it doesn't need > > #address-cells/#size-cells in its parent node. > > > > > > > > So it should be okay to drop #address-cells/#size-cells from dsi node > > > but keep in ports node... > > > > Yes. > > > > > Thoughts...? > > > > But I thought a panel@0 node was being added? If so then you need to add > > them back. > > I guess we should make this optional, keep it when adding panel@0 node > and skip for rest where not applicable..? Dmitry is that fine with you? This sounds like a workaround. When a panel node is added together with the '#address-cells' / '#size-cells' properties, we will get warnings for the 'ports' node. I'd prefer to leave things to pinpoint that the problem is generic rather than being specific to several device trees with the DSI panel nodes. How do other platforms solve the issue? In fact we can try shifting to the following dts schema: dsi@ae940000 { compatible = "qcom,mdss-dsi-ctrl"; ports { #adress-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; port@0 { reg = <0>; dsi0_in: endpoint {}; }; port@1 { reg = <1>; dsi0_out: endpoint { remote-endpoint = <&panel_in>; }; }; /* dsi-bus is a generic part */ dsi-bus { #adress-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; /* panel@0 goes to the board file */ panel@0 { compatible = "vendor,some-panel"; ports { #adress-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; port@0 { reg = <0>; panel_in: endpoint { remote-endpoint = <&dsi0_out>; }; }; }; }; }; WDYT? -- With best wishes Dmitry ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells @ 2022-03-31 9:34 ` Dmitry Baryshkov 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Dmitry Baryshkov @ 2022-03-31 9:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vinod Koul Cc: devicetree, David Airlie, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, Abhinav Kumar, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Krzysztof Kozlowski, freedreno, Sean Paul, linux-kernel On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 at 09:05, Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> wrote: > > On 29-03-22, 10:52, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 12:01:52PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > On 28-03-22, 13:21, Rob Herring wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 12:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On 28/03/2022 19:16, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > > > > On 28-03-22, 19:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > > > > >> On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > > > >> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> > > > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> NAK. > > > > > >> DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. > > > > > >> This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. > > > > > >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). > > > > > > > > > > > > So we should add reg = 0, i will update my dtsi fix > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To "ports" node? No. The reg=0 is for children of the bus, so the > > > > > panels. How to combine both without warnings - ports and panel@0 - I > > > > > don't know yet... > > > > > > > > I don't think that should case a warning. Or at least it's one we turn off. > > > > > > Well in this case I think we might need a fix: > > > Here is the example quoted in the binding. We have ports{} and then the > > > two port@0 and port@1 underneath. > > > > It's the #address-cells/#size-cells under 'ports' that applies to 'port' > > nodes. As 'ports' has no address (reg) itself, it doesn't need > > #address-cells/#size-cells in its parent node. > > > > > > > > So it should be okay to drop #address-cells/#size-cells from dsi node > > > but keep in ports node... > > > > Yes. > > > > > Thoughts...? > > > > But I thought a panel@0 node was being added? If so then you need to add > > them back. > > I guess we should make this optional, keep it when adding panel@0 node > and skip for rest where not applicable..? Dmitry is that fine with you? This sounds like a workaround. When a panel node is added together with the '#address-cells' / '#size-cells' properties, we will get warnings for the 'ports' node. I'd prefer to leave things to pinpoint that the problem is generic rather than being specific to several device trees with the DSI panel nodes. How do other platforms solve the issue? In fact we can try shifting to the following dts schema: dsi@ae940000 { compatible = "qcom,mdss-dsi-ctrl"; ports { #adress-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; port@0 { reg = <0>; dsi0_in: endpoint {}; }; port@1 { reg = <1>; dsi0_out: endpoint { remote-endpoint = <&panel_in>; }; }; /* dsi-bus is a generic part */ dsi-bus { #adress-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; /* panel@0 goes to the board file */ panel@0 { compatible = "vendor,some-panel"; ports { #adress-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; port@0 { reg = <0>; panel_in: endpoint { remote-endpoint = <&dsi0_out>; }; }; }; }; }; WDYT? -- With best wishes Dmitry ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells 2022-03-31 9:34 ` Dmitry Baryshkov @ 2022-03-31 15:51 ` Rob Herring -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Rob Herring @ 2022-03-31 15:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dmitry Baryshkov Cc: Vinod Koul, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Rob Clark, Sean Paul, Abhinav Kumar, David Airlie, Daniel Vetter, Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-arm-msm, dri-devel, freedreno, devicetree, linux-kernel On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 4:35 AM Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 at 09:05, Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > On 29-03-22, 10:52, Rob Herring wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 12:01:52PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > > On 28-03-22, 13:21, Rob Herring wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 12:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On 28/03/2022 19:16, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > > > > > On 28-03-22, 19:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > > > > > >> On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > > > > >> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> > > > > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> NAK. > > > > > > >> DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. > > > > > > >> This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. > > > > > > >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So we should add reg = 0, i will update my dtsi fix > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To "ports" node? No. The reg=0 is for children of the bus, so the > > > > > > panels. How to combine both without warnings - ports and panel@0 - I > > > > > > don't know yet... > > > > > > > > > > I don't think that should case a warning. Or at least it's one we turn off. > > > > > > > > Well in this case I think we might need a fix: > > > > Here is the example quoted in the binding. We have ports{} and then the > > > > two port@0 and port@1 underneath. > > > > > > It's the #address-cells/#size-cells under 'ports' that applies to 'port' > > > nodes. As 'ports' has no address (reg) itself, it doesn't need > > > #address-cells/#size-cells in its parent node. > > > > > > > > > > > So it should be okay to drop #address-cells/#size-cells from dsi node > > > > but keep in ports node... > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > Thoughts...? > > > > > > But I thought a panel@0 node was being added? If so then you need to add > > > them back. > > > > I guess we should make this optional, keep it when adding panel@0 node > > and skip for rest where not applicable..? Dmitry is that fine with you? > > This sounds like a workaround. When a panel node is added together > with the '#address-cells' / '#size-cells' properties, we will get > warnings for the 'ports' node. What warning exactly? Is that with W=1? Some warnings are more "don't do this on new designs" rather than never allowed and need to fix current bindings/dts. As such, these warnings will probably never be enabled by default. Rob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells @ 2022-03-31 15:51 ` Rob Herring 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Rob Herring @ 2022-03-31 15:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dmitry Baryshkov Cc: freedreno, devicetree, David Airlie, linux-arm-msm, Vinod Koul, dri-devel, Abhinav Kumar, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Sean Paul, linux-kernel On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 4:35 AM Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 at 09:05, Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > On 29-03-22, 10:52, Rob Herring wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 12:01:52PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > > On 28-03-22, 13:21, Rob Herring wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 12:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On 28/03/2022 19:16, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > > > > > On 28-03-22, 19:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > > > > > >> On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > > > > >> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> Reported-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> > > > > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> NAK. > > > > > > >> DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. > > > > > > >> This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. > > > > > > >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So we should add reg = 0, i will update my dtsi fix > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To "ports" node? No. The reg=0 is for children of the bus, so the > > > > > > panels. How to combine both without warnings - ports and panel@0 - I > > > > > > don't know yet... > > > > > > > > > > I don't think that should case a warning. Or at least it's one we turn off. > > > > > > > > Well in this case I think we might need a fix: > > > > Here is the example quoted in the binding. We have ports{} and then the > > > > two port@0 and port@1 underneath. > > > > > > It's the #address-cells/#size-cells under 'ports' that applies to 'port' > > > nodes. As 'ports' has no address (reg) itself, it doesn't need > > > #address-cells/#size-cells in its parent node. > > > > > > > > > > > So it should be okay to drop #address-cells/#size-cells from dsi node > > > > but keep in ports node... > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > Thoughts...? > > > > > > But I thought a panel@0 node was being added? If so then you need to add > > > them back. > > > > I guess we should make this optional, keep it when adding panel@0 node > > and skip for rest where not applicable..? Dmitry is that fine with you? > > This sounds like a workaround. When a panel node is added together > with the '#address-cells' / '#size-cells' properties, we will get > warnings for the 'ports' node. What warning exactly? Is that with W=1? Some warnings are more "don't do this on new designs" rather than never allowed and need to fix current bindings/dts. As such, these warnings will probably never be enabled by default. Rob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-03-31 15:51 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 22+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2022-03-28 15:29 [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: dsi: remove address/size cells Krzysztof Kozlowski 2022-03-28 15:52 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2022-03-28 16:43 ` Dmitry Baryshkov 2022-03-28 16:43 ` Dmitry Baryshkov 2022-03-28 17:04 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2022-03-28 17:04 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2022-03-28 17:16 ` Vinod Koul 2022-03-28 17:16 ` Vinod Koul 2022-03-28 17:17 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2022-03-28 17:17 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2022-03-28 18:21 ` Rob Herring 2022-03-28 18:21 ` Rob Herring 2022-03-29 6:31 ` Vinod Koul 2022-03-29 6:31 ` Vinod Koul 2022-03-29 15:52 ` Rob Herring 2022-03-29 15:52 ` Rob Herring 2022-03-31 6:05 ` Vinod Koul 2022-03-31 6:05 ` Vinod Koul 2022-03-31 9:34 ` Dmitry Baryshkov 2022-03-31 9:34 ` Dmitry Baryshkov 2022-03-31 15:51 ` Rob Herring 2022-03-31 15:51 ` Rob Herring
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.