On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 2:47 AM Torsten Duwe <duwe@xxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 11:08:45AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > > > > So for all current practical purposes, we can assume the Teres-I panel > > > to be powered properly and providing valid EDID; nothing to worry about > > > in software. > > > > You're creating a generic binding for all the users of that bridge, > > while considering only the specific case of the Teres-I. > > All I'm saying is that _this_ usage is also valid. Nothing keeps other > users from defining the output panel; on the contrary: the driver at hand > already considers an _optional_ panel and handles it, conditionally. So > driver and binding spec are 100% in sync here. Well, endpoint is not necessarily a panel. It can be another bridge or connector - that's why panel can be optional in driver. But it don't think that you can just omit an endpoint. > This is much more straightforward than requiring an output and making up > some dummy code and params because it cannot reasonably be handled. > (Remember, if there is an output, the driver will make calls to the > "attached device" driver.) They aren't dummy. Moreover you have to attach backlight somewhere (to panel) so it can be disabled when output is disabled. Try 'xrandr --output eDP-1 --off' on teres with your current code and see that backlight stays on. > > Torsten > _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
