On Fri, 2019-02-22 at 14:23 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:37 PM Lubomir Rintel lkundrak@v3.sk wrote:
On Mon, 2019-01-21 at 09:35 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 11:26 AM Lubomir Rintel lkundrak@v3.sk wrote:
The Marvell Armada DRM master device is a virtual device needed to list all nodes that comprise the graphics subsystem.
Signed-off-by: Lubomir Rintel lkundrak@v3.sk
.../display/armada/marvell-armada-drm.txt | 24 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/armada/marvell-armada-drm.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/armada/marvell-armada-drm.txt index de4cca9432c8..3dbfa8047f0b 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/armada/marvell-armada-drm.txt +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/armada/marvell-armada-drm.txt @@ -1,3 +1,27 @@ +Marvell Armada DRM master device +================================
+The Marvell Armada DRM master device is a virtual device needed to list all +nodes that comprise the graphics subsystem.
+Required properties:
- compatible: value should be "marvell,dove-display-subsystem",
- "marvell,armada-display-subsystem"
- ports: a list of phandles pointing to display interface ports of CRTC
- devices
- memory-region: phandle to a node describing memory to be used for the
- framebuffer
+Example:
display-subsystem {compatible = "marvell,dove-display-subsystem","marvell,armada-display-subsystem";memory-region = <&display_reserved>;ports = <&lcd0_port>;If there is only one device, you don't need this virtual node.
Before I follow up on this and submit a version without the virtual node, I'm wondering: is it okay that the bindings for the LCDC and the framebuffer are in the same file, or would it be preferrable if they were separate? Both styles seem to be used for the display bindings.
framebuffer as in the kernel fbdev? Really, that should be the same binding. It's the same h/w after all. However, there have been cases where things deviated. So I don't have a good answer.
No, not the fbdev device, that one is managed by drmfb and is not expressed in DT. I meant the reserved-memory node that sets aside memory for the framebuffers.
See patch "[RFC 03/16] dt-bindings: display: armada: Add framebuffer reserved-mem binding". Perhaps that part should even go to Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/.
Lubo