On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 04:40:50PM +0200, Nicolas Ferre wrote: > On 13/06/2023 at 20:21, Conor Dooley wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 08:17:13PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > On 13/06/2023 09:04, Manikandan Muralidharan wrote: > > > > Add new compatible string for the XLCD controller on SAM9X7 SoC. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Manikandan Muralidharan<manikandan.m@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt | 1 + > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt > > > > index 5f8880cc757e..7c77b6bf4adb 100644 > > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt > > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt > > > > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ Required properties: > > > > "atmel,sama5d3-hlcdc" > > > > "atmel,sama5d4-hlcdc" > > > > "microchip,sam9x60-hlcdc" > > > > + "microchip,sam9x7-xlcdc" > > > Google says sam9x7 is a series, not a SoC. Please add compatibles for > > > specific SoCs, not for series. > > We had this one a few weeks ago, see > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/add5e49e-8416-ba9f-819a-da944938c05f@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > and its parents. Outcome of that seemed to be that using "sam9x7" was fine. > > And it's where it begins to be funny, as the LCD is precisely one aspect > where we differentiate between sam9x75, sam9x72 and sam9x70... Oh dear, just my luck... > So please Manikandan sort this out if difference between these chips will be > better handled with different compatibility string, in particular about //, > LVDS and MIPI-DSI variants! Yeah, providing some information about what the differences actually are would be good, for the same of the actually-knowledgeable-about-displays folk in the audience (IOW, not me). Probably then the display/atmel/hlcdc-dc.txt binding needs an update too?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
