On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:23, Thomas Abraham <thomas.abraham@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > + - samsung,fimd-display: The fimd controller is interfaced with the a > + display device such as a lcd panel. This property should specify the > + phandle of the display device node. For a display device node that > + represents a RGB type display interface, it is expected to specify the > + video interface timing using the following properties. > + > + - lcd-htiming: Specifies the horizontal timing for the overlay. The > + horizontal timing includes four parameters in the following order. > + > + - horizontal back porch (in number of lcd clocks) > + - horizontal front porch (in number of lcd clocks) > + - hsync pulse width (in number of lcd clocks) > + - Display panels X resolution. > + > + - lcd-vtiming: Specifies the vertical timing for the overlay. The > + vertical timing includes four parameters in the following order. > + > + - vertical back porch (in number of lcd lines) > + - vertical front porch (in number of lcd lines) > + - vsync pulse width (in number of lcd clocks) > + - Y resolution. In this old thread, it was suggested to use a raw EDID block to supply timings, and since then a couple of drivers in mainline (sm501fb and fsl-diu) are doing it that way: http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2010-February/080683.html Shouldn't this driver be doing the same thing? If not, shouldn't whatever interface this is adding be provided in a common helper (like that old patch was trying to add) so it's standardized between drivers? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |