On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 01:36:14PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > This commit adds the minimum bindings required to allow describing which > altmodes a port supports. Currently this is limited to just specifying: > > 1. The svid, which is the id of the altmode, e.g. displayport altmode has > a svid of 0xff01. > > 2. The vdo, a 32 bit integer, typically used as a bitmask describing the > capabilities of the altmode, the bits in the vdo are specified in the > specification of the altmode, the dt-binding simply refers to the > specification as that is the canonical source of the meaning of the bits. What if this information should be derived from information already in DT (or would be there if alt mode connections are described)? > > Later on we may want to extend the binding with extra properties specific > to some altmode, but for now this is sufficient to e.g. hook up > displayport alternate-mode. I don't think this is sufficient as it doesn't describe how alternate modes are connected to various components. This has been discussed some here[1] with the CrOS folks. Maybe this is orthogonal, IDK, but I really need something that is somewhat complete and not sprinkle a few new properties at a time. > Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Note I hope I got the yaml correct, this is my first time writing a > dt-binding in the new yaml style. I did run: > make dt_binding_check DT_SCHEMA_FILES=Documentation/devicetree/bindings/connector/usb-connector.yaml > and that was happy. That aspect of it looks fine. Rob [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/4/22/1819
