On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 03:38:20PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> 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 ?
It's not clear to me why this has anything to do with panel-simple, but
the binding is correct, and that requirement is fairly standard. We have
the same thing with panel-lvds for example.
Maxime
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
