On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 06:12:23PM +0200, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 28/02/14 17:59, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > >> +dvi0: connector@0 { > >> + compatible = "dvi-connector"; > >> + label = "dvi"; > >> + > >> + i2c-bus = <&i2c3>; > >> + > >> + dvi_connector_in: endpoint { > >> + remote-endpoint = <&tfp410_out>; > >> + }; > >> +}; > > > > This looks far too simplistic. There are different classes of DVI > > connector - there is: > > > > DVI A - analogue only > > DVI D - digital only (single and dual link) > > DVI I - both (single and dual digital link) > > > > DRM at least makes a distinction between these three classes, and this > > disctinction is part of the user API. How would a display system know > > which kind of DVI connector is wired up on the board from this DT > > description? > > Yes, I think that's a valid change. But do we also need to specify > single/dual link, in addition to the three types? > > I guess the compatible string is the easiest way for differentation, at > least for the three main types, i.e. "dvi-d-connector" etc. > > "dvi-d-1l-connector" and "dvi-d-2l-connector" for the single/dual link? > That looks a bit funny. maybe like this: Required Properties: - compatible: should contain one of the following: * "dvi-d-connector" * "dvi-a-connector" * "dvi-i-connector" Optional Properties: - dual-link: Should be set for dual-link capable connectors -- Sebastian
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature