On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 02:01:38PM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote: > Hi Thierry, > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Thierry Reding > <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:20:40AM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote: > >> Hi Tomi, > >> > >> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxx> wrote: > >> > On 17/09/14 17:29, Ajay kumar wrote: > >> >> Hi Tomi, > >> >> > >> >> Thanks for your comments. > >> >> > >> >> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxx> wrote: > >> >>> On 27/08/14 17:39, Ajay Kumar wrote: > >> >>>> Add documentation for DT properties supported by ps8622/ps8625 > >> >>>> eDP-LVDS converter. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Signed-off-by: Ajay Kumar <ajaykumar.rs@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> >>>> --- > >> >>>> .../devicetree/bindings/video/bridge/ps8622.txt | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ > >> >>>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+) > >> >>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/video/bridge/ps8622.txt > >> >>>> > >> >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/video/bridge/ps8622.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/video/bridge/ps8622.txt > >> >>>> new file mode 100644 > >> >>>> index 0000000..0ec8172 > >> >>>> --- /dev/null > >> >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/video/bridge/ps8622.txt > >> >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ > >> >>>> +ps8622-bridge bindings > >> >>>> + > >> >>>> +Required properties: > >> >>>> + - compatible: "parade,ps8622" or "parade,ps8625" > >> >>>> + - reg: first i2c address of the bridge > >> >>>> + - sleep-gpios: OF device-tree gpio specification for PD_ pin. > >> >>>> + - reset-gpios: OF device-tree gpio specification for RST_ pin. > >> >>>> + > >> >>>> +Optional properties: > >> >>>> + - lane-count: number of DP lanes to use > >> >>>> + - use-external-pwm: backlight will be controlled by an external PWM > >> >>> > >> >>> What does this mean? That the backlight support from ps8625 is not used? > >> >>> If so, maybe "disable-pwm" or something? > >> >> "use-external-pwm" or "disable-bridge-pwm" would be better. > >> > > >> > Well, the properties are about the bridge. "use-external-pwm" means that > >> > the bridge uses an external PWM, which, if I understood correctly, is > >> > not what the property is about. > >> > > >> > "disable-bridge-pwm" is ok, but the "bridge" there is extra. The > >> > properties are about the bridge, so it's implicit. > >> Ok. I will use "disable-pwm". > > > > Why is this even necessary? According to the datasheet this device has > > circuitry for backlight control. If so, I'd expect it to expose either a > > backlight device or a PWM device. That way unless somebody is using the > > backlight/PWM exposed by the bridge the bridge can simply disable PWM. > The driver does expose a backlight device. > And, the decision(whether to expose a backlight device or not) is made > based on the DT flag "use-external-pwm". > This was discussed before, and you suggested to use the boolean > property, refer to this link: > http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2014-July/065048.html I think you misunderstood what I said, or maybe I didn't explain clearly what I meant. If the PS8622 provides a backlight there's nothing wrong with always exposing it. The bridge itself isn't going to be using the backlight anyway. Rather the panel itself should be using the backlight device exposed by PS8622 or some separate backlight device. To illustrate by an example: ps8622: ... { compatible = "parade,ps8622"; ... }; panel { ... backlight = <&ps8622>; ... }; Or: backlight: ... { compatible = "pwm-backlight"; ... }; panel { ... backlight = <&backlight>; ... }; What you did in v6 of this series was look up a backlight device and then not use it. That seemed unnecessary. Looking at v6 again the reason for getting a phandle to the backlight was so that the device itself did not expose its own backlight controlling circuitry if an external one was being used. But since the bridge has no business controlling the backlight, having the backlight phandle in the bridge is not correct. So I think what you could do in the driver instead is always expose the backlight device. If the panel used a different backlight, the PS8622's internal on simply wouldn't be accessed. It would still be possible to control the backlight in sysfs, but that shouldn't be a problem (only root can access it). That said, I have no strong objections to the boolean property if you feel like it's really necessary. Thierry
Attachment:
pgpTh79NtJNmk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
