On 16/06/2023 at 08:44, Manikandan M - I67131 wrote:
On 14/06/23 20:10, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
On 13/06/2023 at 20:21, Conor Dooley wrote:
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 08:17:13PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 13/06/2023 09:04, Manikandan Muralidharan wrote:
Add new compatible string for the XLCD controller on SAM9X7 SoC.
Signed-off-by: Manikandan Muralidharan<manikandan.m@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt
b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt
index 5f8880cc757e..7c77b6bf4adb 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt
@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ Required properties:
"atmel,sama5d3-hlcdc"
"atmel,sama5d4-hlcdc"
"microchip,sam9x60-hlcdc"
+ "microchip,sam9x7-xlcdc"
Google says sam9x7 is a series, not a SoC. Please add compatibles for
specific SoCs, not for series.
We had this one a few weeks ago, see
https://lore.kernel.org/all/add5e49e-8416-ba9f-819a-da944938c05f@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
and its parents. Outcome of that seemed to be that using "sam9x7" was
fine.
And it's where it begins to be funny, as the LCD is precisely one aspect
where we differentiate between sam9x75, sam9x72 and sam9x70...
So please Manikandan sort this out if difference between these chips
will be better handled with different compatibility string, in
particular about //, LVDS and MIPI-DSI variants!
Yes Sure, I will replace the compatible as s/sam9x7/sam9x75/g to handle
the different variants of sam9x7 better.
Moving to sam9x75 is probably good. But what is your plan for
differentiating parallel and LVDS (on sam9x72) and precisely this
sam9x75 variant which in addition has MIPI-DSI?
Regards,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas Ferre
