On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 10:02 AM, Tomi Valkeinen <tomba@xxxxxx> wrote: >> But my main concern for this series is still that it creates custom >> panel stuff, and adds DT bindings for them. Which means we need to >> support those custom DT bindings in the future, even though it's quite >> sure that CDF should be used also for this driver, changing the bindings. > > I'm confused a bit, but shouldn't the DT bindings and CDF be rather > orthogonal? Of course for ARM board support we need to have DT binding > tables in the kernel to match up hw with the drivers, but I've thought > it should be pretty much irrelevant which driver is hooking up to a > given dt binding ... I expect main thing that could/would change is who is the parent device.. well that and the 'compatible' string probably changes? BR, -R > -Daniel > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
