On 02/24/2016 01:34 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 01:11:24PM +0200, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/02/16 12:43, Archit Taneja wrote:
On 02/23/2016 02:48 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 22/02/16 22:10, Rob Herring wrote:
If we want all DSI host controllers to use a common binding to describe
lanes, we'd need to go with the most flexible one, and the driver
restricts it to the subsets that we support.
True, but I wonder if that's necessary. The lane property for the SoC
should be read by the SoC specific driver, right? So the DT property can
be anything. I'm not sure if there's ever a reason for a generic code to
observe the DSI lane setup.
Yeah, it is very SoC specific.
Agreed.
Okay. We probably don't need to go with a generic binding, then. I'll
simplify the msm/dsi lane bindings (i.e, drop the clock lanes, and
represent things in lanes instead of pins).
Thanks,
Archit
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora
Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
