On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 12:01:52PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
On 28-03-22, 13:21, Rob Herring wrote:
On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 12:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org wrote:
On 28/03/2022 19:16, Vinod Koul wrote:
On 28-03-22, 19:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 18:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org wrote:
The DSI node is not a bus and the children do not have unit addresses.
Reported-by: Vinod Koul vkoul@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
NAK. DSI panels are children of the DSI device tree node with the reg = <0>; address. This is the convention used by other platforms too (see e.g. arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-evk.dts).
So we should add reg = 0, i will update my dtsi fix
To "ports" node? No. The reg=0 is for children of the bus, so the panels. How to combine both without warnings - ports and panel@0 - I don't know yet...
I don't think that should case a warning. Or at least it's one we turn off.
Well in this case I think we might need a fix: Here is the example quoted in the binding. We have ports{} and then the two port@0 and port@1 underneath.
It's the #address-cells/#size-cells under 'ports' that applies to 'port' nodes. As 'ports' has no address (reg) itself, it doesn't need #address-cells/#size-cells in its parent node.
So it should be okay to drop #address-cells/#size-cells from dsi node but keep in ports node...
Yes.
Thoughts...?
But I thought a panel@0 node was being added? If so then you need to add them back.
Rob