Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: Hello Connor, > On Sun, Dec 17, 2023 at 11:07:03AM +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: [...] >> +properties: >> + compatible: >> + enum: >> + - solomon,ssd1331 >> + >> +required: >> + - compatible >> + - reg >> + >> +allOf: >> + - $ref: solomon,ssd-common.yaml# >> + >> + - if: >> + properties: >> + compatible: >> + contains: >> + const: solomon,ssd1331 >> + then: >> + properties: >> + width: >> + default: 96 >> + height: >> + default: 64 > > Do you envisage a rake of devices that are going to end up in this > binding? Otherwise, why not unconditionally set the constraints? > Because these are only for the default width and height, there can be panels using the same controller but that have a different resolution. For example, there are panels using the SSD1306 controller that have 128x32 [0], 64x32 [1] or 128x64 [2] resolutions. But answering your question, yes I think that more devices for this SSD133x family are going to be added later. Looking at [3], there is at least SSD1333 that has a different default resolutions (176x176). I think that even the SSD135x family could be supported by the same modsetting pipeline, but I need to get one to figure it out. [0]: https://es.aliexpress.com/item/1005003648174074.html [1]: https://www.buydisplay.com/white-0-49-inch-oled-display-64x32-iic-i2c-ssd1306-connector-fpc [2]: https://es.aliexpress.com/item/1005001582340858.html?gatewayAdapt=glo2esp [3]: https://www.solomon-systech.com/product-search/?technology=oled-display > Cheers, > Conor. -- Best regards, Javier Martinez Canillas Core Platforms Red Hat
