Hi list,
I'd like to open a discussion about the current support of MIPI DSI and DBI panels.
Both are standards from the MIPI alliance, both are communication protocols between a LCD controller and a LCD panel, they generally both use the same commands (DCS), the main difference is that DSI is serial and DBI is generally parallel.
In the kernel right now, DSI is pretty well implemented. All the infrastucture to register a DSI host, DSI device etc. is there. DSI panels are implemented as regular drm_panel instances, and their drivers go through the DSI API to communicate with the panel, which makes them independent of the DSI host driver.
DBI, on the other hand, does not have any of this. All (?) DBI panels are implemented as tinydrm drivers, which make them impossible to use with regular DRM drivers. Writing a standard drm_panel driver is impossible, as there is no concept of host and device. All these tinydrm drivers register their own DBI host as they all do DBI over SPI.
I think this needs a good cleanup. Given that DSI and DBI are so similar, it would probably make sense to fuse DBI support into the current DSI code, as trying to update DBI would result in a lot of code being duplicated. With the proper host/device registration mechanism from DSI code, it would be possible to turn most of the tinydrm drivers into regular drm_panel drivers.
The problem then is that these should still be available as tinydrm drivers. If the DSI/DBI panels can somehow register a .update_fb() callback, it would make it possible to have a panel-agnostic tinydrm driver, which would then probably open a lot of doors, and help a lot to clean the mess.
I think I can help with that, I just need some guidance - I am fishing in exotic seas here.
Thoughts, comments, are very welcome.
Cheers, -Paul