On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 09:27:21AM +0800, Yakir Yang wrote:
Hi Rob,
On 11/12/2015 07:10 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 09:09:15AM +0800, Yakir Yang wrote:
Some edp screen do not have hpd signal, so we can't just return failed when hpd plug in detect failed.
This is an hardware property, so we need add a devicetree property "analogix,need-force-hpd" to indicate this sutiation.
Tested-by: Heiko Stuebner heiko@sntech.de Tested-by: Javier Martinez Canillas javier@osg.samsung.com Signed-off-by: Yakir Yang ykk@rock-chips.com
I didn't find this one in v10. Did it get dropped?
You are in my 'to' list, but I haven't send the whole v10 out, most of them don't need update :)
Okay, it's just gmail's inability to follow threading...
This series should be: ---- [v8 0/17 ...] |---- [v8 1/17 ...] |---- [v8 2/17 ...] |---- [v8 3/17 ...] |---- [...] |---- [v8 15/17 ...] |---- [v8 16/17 ...] |---- [v8 17/17 ...] | |---- [v9 10/17 ...] |---- [v9 15/17 ...] |---- We are here |---- [v9 09/17 ...] |---- [v10 09/17 ...] |---- Received an acked from you
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/analogix_dp.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/analogix_dp.txt index 7659a7a..74f0e80 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/analogix_dp.txt +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/analogix_dp.txt @@ -22,6 +22,9 @@ Required properties for dp-controller: from general PHY binding: Should be "dp". Optional properties for dp-controller:
- -analogix,need-force-hpd:
Indicate driver need force hpd when hpd detect failed, thisis used for some eDP screen which don't have hpd signal.This should be a generic property.
This property would only need in some no-hpd case, it would be dropped if panel keep the hotplug signal, that's why I thought it should be optional.
I agree it is optional. I just mean drop the analogix and put in a common binding doc (i.e. create a display/bridge/common.txt). Needing to ignore HPD is probably a common problem.
I thought if we put this a property to generic property, then we must need to define it in normal device node, not sure whether it is right :)
Sorry, I don't follow.
Rob