On 6/9/2017 6:31 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 10:43:07AM +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
Hello,
On 09-06-2017 05:11, Archit Taneja wrote:
Hi Philippe, Rob,
On 06/08/2017 09:10 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
Seems strange there's not also a pixel or bit clock? Or this
gets driven
from the phy?
Since you mention phy here, I wanted to share a concern with
the bindings.
These bindings don't have a separate PHY DT node. The PHY is
assumed as a
part of the IP when integrated by a SoC. There are already
rockchip and
hisil DSI bindings that use this IP but don't define a PHY node.
It's a similar situation with the DW-HDMI bindings.
For example, when the DW HDMI is integrated in rockchip or
renesas SoC, the
bindings "rockchip,rk3288-dw-hdmi" or "renesas,r8a7795-dw-hdmi"
are used,
and they don't have a separate PHY DT node.
I wasn't sure whether this is the right way to proceed or not
for such IPs.
Some advice would help us here.
Thanks,
Archit
I just want to add that read/writes from/to phy are done using
the controller (in HDMI and in MIPI DSI Host), so the only way to
have a phy driver is that if some custom callbacks are provided
or if the memory region is shared.
Anyway, I agree with Archit in the sense that phy + controller
are highly tied. Also, these two "pieces" are SoC specific and
sometimes very different between SoC's because they can be
customized so I think a different compatible string suits well here.
When the phy is integrated like this, I agree that it doesn't make sense
to have a separate phy node.
Great. Thanks for the clarification Jose and Rob.
Archit
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
