On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 02:07:32PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 01:35:56PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 03:43:24PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
+static const struct of_device_id imx_pd_dt_ids[] = {
- { .compatible = "fsl,imx-parallel-display", .data = NULL, },
Can we use particular soc name to define the compatible string?
Just realized that it's actually not representing any hardware block. If that's the case, I feel we should try to get it away from device tree.
It actually represents a hardware block, or what else should a display be? You are right in the way that it does not correspond to some register block, but still it's hardware. The information about the connected display must definitely live in the devicetree, I can't think off any other place.
(We could argue that the displays should be subnodes of the IPU. I have chosen not to do so because other display connections such as the LVDS unit are outside of the IPU, but still need a display description.)
Sascha