On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 06:12:23PM +0200, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> On 28/02/14 17:59, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>
> >> +dvi0: connector@0 {
> >> + compatible = "dvi-connector";
> >> + label = "dvi";
> >> +
> >> + i2c-bus = <&i2c3>;
> >> +
> >> + dvi_connector_in: endpoint {
> >> + remote-endpoint = <&tfp410_out>;
> >> + };
> >> +};
> >
> > This looks far too simplistic. There are different classes of DVI
> > connector - there is:
> >
> > DVI A - analogue only
> > DVI D - digital only (single and dual link)
> > DVI I - both (single and dual digital link)
> >
> > DRM at least makes a distinction between these three classes, and this
> > disctinction is part of the user API. How would a display system know
> > which kind of DVI connector is wired up on the board from this DT
> > description?
>
> Yes, I think that's a valid change. But do we also need to specify
> single/dual link, in addition to the three types?
>
> I guess the compatible string is the easiest way for differentation, at
> least for the three main types, i.e. "dvi-d-connector" etc.
>
> "dvi-d-1l-connector" and "dvi-d-2l-connector" for the single/dual link?
> That looks a bit funny.
maybe like this:
Required Properties:
- compatible: should contain one of the following:
* "dvi-d-connector"
* "dvi-a-connector"
* "dvi-i-connector"
Optional Properties:
- dual-link: Should be set for dual-link capable connectors
-- Sebastian
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
