Hi Liu Ying, On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 10:37:27AM +0800, Liu Ying wrote: > Hi Sam, > > On Wed, 2020-11-04 at 11:47 +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > Hi Liu Ying > > > > On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 04:03:37PM +0800, Liu Ying wrote: > > > Some simple panels have dual LVDS interfaces which receive even and > > > odd > > > pixels respectively, like 'nlt,nl192108ac18-02d' and > > > 'koe,tx26d202vm0bwa'. > > > So, let's allow optional 'ports' property so that pixel order can > > > be got > > > via drm_of_lvds_get_dual_link_pixel_order() if it's child nodes > > > 'port@0' > > > and 'port@1' contain 'dual-lvds-even-pixels' and 'dual-lvds-odd- > > > pixels' > > > properties respectively. > > > > A panel with dual LVDS interfaces is no longer in the "simple" > > category. > > The panel-simple binding shall be limited to the simple pnales only. > > > > This is also why we have for example panel-simple-dsi binding. > > > > Please consider either a binding dedicated for the dual port displays > > or > > Thanks for your review. > > Does a new 'panel-simple-lvds-dual-ports.yaml' binding look ok? > I assume it would inherit all properties of panel-simple.yaml and all > existing compatibles of LVDS panels with dual ports in > panel-simple.yaml can be moved to it. Yes, that would be fine. If possible we shall have similar panels described by the same binding. Try to send out the binding for review early before starting to move too much around - so we can get an early look at it at see if this is indeed the right direction to go. Sam
