On Sun, Dec 26, 2021 at 02:34:08AM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 25 Dec 2021 at 23:54, David Heidelberg <david@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > This binding is not much validating the old DSI v2.
> >
> > Currently we don't differentiate old v2 from new versions,
> > so we need to figure out how to validate them.
> >
> > I propose specific compatible depending on mdss version, but I would be
> > glad, if someone with deeper knowledge proposed the names.
> >
> > I'm willing to implement it then and back from autodetection.
>
> I'd suggest to use hardware-specific compatible for apq8064 (and maybe
> other v2 hosts if somebody adds support). For example
> "qcom,apq8064-dsi-ctrl" or "qcom,dsi-ctrl-apq8064" (no strong
> preference here).
The former.
> For 6G hosts it will probably make sense to use IP versions instead
> ("qcom-dsi-ctrl-6g-v2.4.1").
Humm, we went down the path of version numbers for QCom blocks, but the
result was not much reuse of same version on more than 2-3 parts if
that. So stick with SoCs for naming unless there's a strong case that
version numbers to SoC parts is 1 to many.
Rob
