Hi Prabhakar
On Mon, Mar 09, 2020 at 09:23:24PM +0000, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
Hi Rob,
On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 8:32 PM Rob Herring robh@kernel.org wrote:
On Fri, 6 Mar 2020 15:20:31 +0000, Lad Prabhakar wrote:
From: Fabrizio Castro fabrizio.castro@bp.renesas.com
Add binding for the idk-2121wr LVDS panel from Advantech.
Some panel-specific documentation can be found here: https://buy.advantech.eu/Displays/Embedded-LCD-Kits-High-Brightness/model-ID...
Signed-off-by: Fabrizio Castro fabrizio.castro@bp.renesas.com Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com
Apologies for flooding in I missed to add the ML email-ids for the earlier version so resending it.
Hi All,
This patch is part of series [1] ("Add dual-LVDS panel support to EK874), all the patches have been accepted from it except this one. I have fixed Rob's comments in this version of the patch.
[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11297589/
v6->7
- Added reference to lvds.yaml
- Changed maintainer to myself
- Switched to dual license
- Dropped required properties except for ports as rest are already listed in lvds.panel
- Dropped Reviewed-by tag of Laurent, due to the changes made it might not be valid.
v5->v6:
- No change
v4->v5:
- No change
v3->v4:
- Absorbed patch "dt-bindings: display: Add bindings for LVDS bus-timings"
- Big restructuring after Rob's and Laurent's comments
v2->v3:
- New patch
.../display/panel/advantech,idk-2121wr.yaml | 120 +++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 120 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/advantech,idk-2121wr.yaml
My bot found errors running 'make dt_binding_check' on your patch:
/builds/robherring/linux-dt-review/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/advantech,idk-2121wr.example.dt.yaml: panel-lvds: 'port' is a required property /builds/robherring/linux-dt-review/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/advantech,idk-2121wr.example.dt.yaml: panel-lvds: 'port' is a required property
This panel is a dual channel LVDS, as a result the root port is called as ports instead of port and the child node port@0 and port@1 are used for even and odd pixels, hence binding has required property as ports instead of port.
What goes wrong is that you have a ref to lvds.yaml - and thus you get also required from that file.
So basically - I think this binding should not have a ref to lvds.yaml - as the binding needs to be different.
Sam