Hi Tomi,
Am Mittwoch, den 26.02.2014, 15:14 +0200 schrieb Tomi Valkeinen:
> On 25/02/14 16:58, Philipp Zabel wrote:
>
> > +Optional endpoint properties
> > +----------------------------
> > +
> > +- remote-endpoint: phandle to an 'endpoint' subnode of a remote device node.
>
> Why is that optional? What use is an endpoint, if it's not connected to
> something?
This allows to include the an empty endpoint template in a SoC dtsi for
the convenience of board dts writers. Also, the same property is
currently listed as optional in video-interfaces.txt.
soc.dtsi:
display-controller {
port {
disp0: endpoint { };
};
};
board.dts:
#include "soc.dtsi"
&disp0 {
remote-endpoint = <&panel_input>;
};
panel {
port {
panel_in: endpoint {
remote-endpoint = <&disp0>;
};
};
};
Any board not using that port can just leave the endpoint disconnected.
On the other hand, the same could be achieved with Heiko Stübner's
conditional nodes dtc patch:
soc.dtsi:
display-controller {
port {
/delete-unreferenced/ disp0: endpoint { };
};
};
> Also, if this is being worked on, I'd like to propose the addition of
> simpler single-endpoint cases which I've been using with OMAP DSS. So if
> there's just a single endpoint for the device, which is very common, you
> can have just:
>
> device {
> ...
> endpoint { ... };
> };
>
> However, I guess that the patch just keeps growing and growing, so maybe
> it's better to add such things later =).
Yes, that looks good. I'd be happy if we could add this in a second step
as a backwards compatible simplification.
regards
Philipp
--
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
