Il 29/02/24 03:35, Jason-JH.Lin ha scritto:
Since MT8195 gamma has multiple bank for 12 bits LUT and it is
different from any other SoC LUT setting.
So we move MT8195 compatible from the one of items to the
single enum group.
Signed-off-by: Jason-JH.Lin <jason-jh.lin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,gamma.yaml | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,gamma.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,gamma.yaml
index c6641acd75d6..3e6cb8f48bcc 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,gamma.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,gamma.yaml
@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ properties:
- enum:
- mediatek,mt8173-disp-gamma
- mediatek,mt8183-disp-gamma
+ - mediatek,mt8195-disp-gamma
- items:
- enum:
- mediatek,mt6795-disp-gamma
@@ -33,7 +34,6 @@ properties:
- mediatek,mt8186-disp-gamma
- mediatek,mt8188-disp-gamma
- mediatek,mt8192-disp-gamma
- - mediatek,mt8195-disp-gamma
While I agree on allowing mt8195-disp-gamma to have its own separated compatible
as the IP is actually different from the one in MT8183, you can't do it like that,
or dtbs_check will fail validation for the mt8195 devicetree.
That one declares...
gamma0: gamma@1c006000 {
compatible = "mediatek,mt8195-disp-gamma", "mediatek,mt8183-disp-gamma";
...Please always run dtbs_check when performing bindings modifications.
Cheers,
Angelo
- const: mediatek,mt8183-disp-gamma
reg:
