On 2013-12-17 09:05, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> Hi Tomi,
>
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 04:56:30PM +0200, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/video/omap2/displays-new/connector-dvi.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/video/omap2/displays-new/connector-dvi.c b/drivers/video/omap2/displays-new/connector-dvi.c
>> index b6c50904038e..d1204b1c5182 100644
>>
>> +static const struct of_device_id dvic_of_match[] = {
>> + { .compatible = "dvi-connector", },
>
> Either the driver is too specific or the binding is too generic, but
> having such a generic name for an omap specific driver seems wrong. Same
> for panel-dpi, svideo-connector, composite-video-connector and hdmi-connector,
Hmm. Good point. I was thinking that the driver is only used on OMAP,
but of course that's not true, the driver is there for all platforms if
the kernel just happens to be compiled with the driver.
And it's not just about those drivers you mention. The same issue is
there for, say, "ti,tpd12s015". I have an omapdss specific driver for
that, but if some other platform uses the same chip, they'll have a
driver for it also...
Sigh. I wonder how this should be handled... The only solution that
comes to my mind is to have all the compatible strings as "ti,...". But
that's not correct, as they are not TI components, but some are generic
ones and some from another vendor.
And even "ti,..." is not good, as there are other TI SoCs with other
display drivers. So I'd need to prepend the compatible strings with
"omapdss,...", making the hardware components driver specific.
The long term plan is to make the drivers generic (or implement the same
driver for common display framework). But for now I need to have future
proof DT bindings with omapdss specific drivers...
Tomi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
