Hi Russell,
On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 11:33 AM Russell King (Oracle)
<linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 10:28:22AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > No, you can still use port:
> >
> > +oneOf:
> > + - required:
> > + - port
> > + - required:
> > + - ports
> >
> > When using ports, no further requirements are set, but perhaps port@0
> > should be made required in that case?
>
> Maybe I don't understand the binding description then, but to me it
> looks like you require both port@0 and port@1.
"make dtbs_check" disagrees.
> The reality of the driver is that it makes almost no use of the graph
> itself, except via drm_of_find_possible_crtcs() to find the connected
> CRTCs. If it is connected to an I2S source, then it probably needs a
> port specification for that. If someone wants to describe the HDMI
> connector (which I don't see any point in) then they likely need a
I can't comment on the point of describing the HDMI connector.
> port specification for that too. However, the driver itself doesn't
> care about any of those.
DT describes hardware, not software limitations.
> So, describing the port nodes makes no sense.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
