<html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> Hi Thierry & Rob, Sorry, apologize for the delay in replying :-) <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 09/07/2015 04:20 PM, Thierry Reding wrote: </div> <blockquote cite="mid:20150907082017.GB19961@ulmo.nvidia.com" type="cite"> <pre wrap="">On Sun, Sep 06, 2015 at 11:59:08AM +0800, Yakir Yang wrote: </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">Hi Thierry, 在 09/03/2015 05:04 PM, Thierry Reding 写道: </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">On Thu, Sep 03, 2015 at 12:27:47PM +0800, Yakir Yang wrote: </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">Hi Rob, 在 09/03/2015 04:17 AM, Rob Herring 写道: </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 1:14 AM, Yakir Yang <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ykk@rock-chips.com"><ykk@rock-chips.com></a> wrote: </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">Some edp screen do not have hpd signal, so we can't just return failed when hpd plug in detect failed. </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap="">This is a property of the panel (or connector perhaps), so this property should be located there. At least, it is a common issue and not specific to this chip. We could have an HDMI connector and failed to hook up HPD for example. A connector node is also where hpd-gpios should be located instead (and are already defined by ../bindings/video/hdmi-connector.txt). Perhaps we need a eDP connector binding, too. </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap="">Yep, I agree with your front point, it is a property of panel, not specific to eDP controller, so this code should handle in connector logic. </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap="">From your description it sounds more like this is in fact a property of the panel. Or maybe I should say "quirk". If the panel doesn't generate the HPD signal, then that should be a property of the panel, not the connector. The eDP specification mandates that connectors have a HPD signal, though it allows the "HPD conductor in the connector cable" to be omitted if not used by the source. I'd consider the cable to belong to the panel rather than the connector, so absence of HPD, either because the cable doesn't have the conductor or because the panel does not generate the signal, should be a quirk of the panel. That said you could have a panel that supports HPD connected via a cable that doesn't transmit it, so this would be a per-board variant and hence should be a device tree property rather than hard-coded in some panel driver. Conversely, if the panel isn't capable of generating an HPD signal, then I don't think it would be appropriate to make it a DT property. It would be better to hard-code it in the driver, lest someone forget to set the property in DT and get stuck with a device that isn't operational. </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> Oh, you're right, if it's a cable quirk, then DT property would be okay, if it is a problem of panel, then maybe hard-code in driver would be better. After look up for the document of panel "innolux,n116bge", I haven't see any description of hot plug signal, and even not found in PIN ASSIGNMENT. So I believe it's a panel problem, that's to say it should handle in panel driver. </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> The datasheet that I have for that panel lists HPD as pin 17. Also I used to have a setup with that panel and I distinctly remember hotplug working just fine. Perhaps this is an issue with a specific variant of the panel? Or perhaps this is indeed a problem with the cable that's connecting the panel to the board. It could be one of those cases where they left out the HPD conductor to save money.</pre> </blockquote> You're right, I guess I just download the wrong datasheet "N116BGE-L41.pdf" which the video interfaces is "LVDS", thanks for you point out. And I double checked with the guys who work with this screen vendor, he said that it's the fault that vendor missed HPD pin on the screen board, and vendor have fixed this problem later. But there are still some machine didn't contain the HPD signal, and you also mention that in some cases where vendor would left out the HPD conductor, so I still wish to support those "quirk" screen in the later version. But I wish you could share your opinion whether this could exist in the mainline kernel. If the answer is no, okay, I would remove this from the next versions. but If the answer is yes, wow, I may still can use the DT property to satisfied this demand (I guess it's okay to keep the DT property way from previous discussion). Thanks, - Yakir <blockquote cite="mid:20150907082017.GB19961@ulmo.nvidia.com" type="cite"> <pre wrap=""> Thierry </pre> <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset> <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________ Linux-rockchip mailing list <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org">Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip">http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip</a> </pre> </blockquote> </body> </html>