On Sun, Feb 16, 2020 at 07:15:13PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > RFC only - not tested yet! > > The panel-dpi compatible is a fallback that > allows the DT to specify the timing. > > When matching panel-dpi expect the device tree to include the > timing information for the display-panel. > > Background for this change: > There are a lot of panels and new models hits the market very often. > It is a lost cause trying to chase them all and users of new panels > will often find them in situations that the panel they ues are not > supported by the kernel. > On top of this a lot of panels are customized based on customer > specifications. > > Including the panel timing in the device tree allows for a simple > way to describe the actual HW and use this description in a generic > way in the kernel. > This allows uses of proprietary panels, or panels which are not > included in the kernel, to specify the timing in the device tree > together with all the other HW descriptions. > And thus, using the device tree it is then easy to add support > for an otherwise unknown panel. > > The current support expect panels that do not require any > delays for prepare/enable/disable/unprepare. > > Signed-off-by: Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Maxime Ripard <mripard@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Oleksandr Suvorov <oleksandr.suvorov@xxxxxxxxxxx> I submitted a similar patch a year ago: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2019-March/209682.html So I'm all for it :) Regardless of the outcome of this discussion, for all the patches: Acked-by: Maxime Ripard <mripard@xxxxxxxxxx> Maxime
