On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 12:57, Maxime Ripard <maxime@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >Hi, > >On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 12:39:06AM +0200, Guillaume Ranquet wrote: >> From: Markus Schneider-Pargmann <msp@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> DP_INTF is similar to DPI but does not have the exact same feature set >> or register layouts. >> >> DP_INTF is the sink of the display pipeline that is connected to the >> DisplayPort controller and encoder unit. It takes the same clocks as >> DPI. >> >> Signed-off-by: Markus Schneider-Pargmann <msp@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Guillaume Ranquet <granquet@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> .../bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,dpi.yaml | 11 ++++++----- >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,dpi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,dpi.yaml >> index dd2896a40ff0..2dba80ad3b18 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,dpi.yaml >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,dpi.yaml >> @@ -4,16 +4,16 @@ >> $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/display/mediatek/mediatek,dpi.yaml# >> $schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# >> >> -title: mediatek DPI Controller Device Tree Bindings >> +title: mediatek DPI/DP_INTF Controller >> >> maintainers: >> - CK Hu <ck.hu@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> - Jitao shi <jitao.shi@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> description: | >> - The Mediatek DPI function block is a sink of the display subsystem and >> - provides 8-bit RGB/YUV444 or 8/10/10-bit YUV422 pixel data on a parallel >> - output bus. >> + The Mediatek DPI and DP_INTF function blocks are a sink of the display >> + subsystem and provides 8-bit RGB/YUV444 or 8/10/10-bit YUV422 pixel data on a >> + parallel output bus. >> >> properties: >> compatible: >> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ properties: >> - mediatek,mt8173-dpi >> - mediatek,mt8183-dpi >> - mediatek,mt8192-dpi >> + - mediatek,mt8195-dpintf > >It seems a bit weird to have all instances of DP_INTF with a separator >but the compatible doesn't have one? > >Is there a reason to not use dp-intf? None that I know of, It was taken as is from the vendor tree. I'll use dp-intf in v10 for the sake of consistency. Thx, Guillaume. > >Maxime
