On 2/23/22 15:37, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 03:09:08PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
On 2/23/22 14:47, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 02:45:30PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
On 2/23/22 14:41, Maxime Ripard wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 09:47:23AM +0100, Max Krummenacher wrote:
Use the new property bus-format to set the enum bus_format and bpc.
Completes: commit 4a1d0dbc8332 ("drm/panel: simple: add panel-dpi support")
Signed-off-by: Max Krummenacher <max.krummenacher@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-simple.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 32 insertions(+)
Relates to the discussion: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220201110717.3585-1-cniedermaier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Max
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-simple.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-simple.c
index c5f133667a2d..5c07260de71c 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-simple.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-simple.c
@@ -453,6 +453,7 @@ static int panel_dpi_probe(struct device *dev,
struct panel_desc *desc;
unsigned int bus_flags;
struct videomode vm;
+ const char *format = "";
int ret;
np = dev->of_node;
@@ -477,6 +478,37 @@ static int panel_dpi_probe(struct device *dev,
of_property_read_u32(np, "width-mm", &desc->size.width);
of_property_read_u32(np, "height-mm", &desc->size.height);
+ of_property_read_string(np, "bus-format", &format);
+ if (!strcmp(format, "BGR888_1X24")) {
+ desc->bpc = 8;
+ desc->bus_format = MEDIA_BUS_FMT_BGR888_1X24;
+ } else if (!strcmp(format, "GBR888_1X24")) {
+ desc->bpc = 8;
+ desc->bus_format = MEDIA_BUS_FMT_GBR888_1X24;
+ } else if (!strcmp(format, "RBG888_1X24")) {
+ desc->bpc = 8;
+ desc->bus_format = MEDIA_BUS_FMT_RBG888_1X24;
+ } else if (!strcmp(format, "RGB444_1X12")) {
+ desc->bpc = 6;
+ desc->bus_format = MEDIA_BUS_FMT_RGB444_1X12;
+ } else if (!strcmp(format, "RGB565_1X16")) {
+ desc->bpc = 6;
+ desc->bus_format = MEDIA_BUS_FMT_RGB565_1X16;
+ } else if (!strcmp(format, "RGB666_1X18")) {
+ desc->bpc = 6;
+ desc->bus_format = MEDIA_BUS_FMT_RGB666_1X18;
+ } else if (!strcmp(format, "RGB666_1X24_CPADHI")) {
+ desc->bpc = 6;
+ desc->bus_format = MEDIA_BUS_FMT_RGB666_1X24_CPADHI;
+ } else if (!strcmp(format, "RGB888_1X24")) {
+ desc->bpc = 8;
+ desc->bus_format = MEDIA_BUS_FMT_RGB888_1X24;
+ } else {
+ dev_err(dev, "%pOF: missing or unknown bus-format property\n",
+ np);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
It doesn't seem right, really. We can't the bus format / bpc be inferred
from the compatible? I'd expect two panels that don't have the same bus
format to not be claimed as compatible.
Which compatible ?
Note that this is for panel-dpi compatible, i.e. the panel which has timings
specified in DT (and needs bus format specified there too).
panel-dpi is supposed to have two compatibles, the panel-specific one
and panel-dpi. This would obviously be tied to the panel-specific one.
This whole discussion is about the one which only has 'panel-dpi' compatible
and describes the panel in DT completely. The specific compatible is not
present in DT when this patch is needed.
From the panel-dpi DT binding:
properties:
compatible:
description:
Shall contain a panel specific compatible and "panel-dpi"
in that order.
items:
- {}
- const: panel-dpi
The panel-specific compatible is mandatory, whether you like it or not.
It doesn't seem to me that's the intended use per panel-simple.c , so
maybe the bindings need to be fixed too ?
