[PATCH 1/2] drm/fsl-dcu: update the panel dt binding document

[Stefan Agner]

On 2016-06-28 14:07, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 05:39:07PM +0800, Meng Yi wrote:
>> dropped the old "fsl,panel" property, using the of_graph dt
>> binding syntax
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Meng Yi <meng.yi at nxp.com>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/fsl,dcu.txt | 9 +++++++--
>>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/fsl,dcu.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/fsl,dcu.txt
>> index ae55cde..f44cf5b 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/fsl,dcu.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/fsl,dcu.txt
>> @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ Required properties:
>>  - clock-names:		Should be "dcu" and "pix"
>>  			See ../clocks/clock-bindings.txt for details.
>>  - big-endian		Boolean property, LS1021A DCU registers are big-endian.
>> -- fsl,panel:		The phandle to panel node.
>> +- port			Video port for the panel output
>>
>>  Optional properties:
>>  - fsl,tcon:		The phandle to the timing controller node.
>> @@ -24,6 +24,11 @@ dcu: dcu at 2ce0000 {
>>  	clocks = <&platform_clk 0>, <&platform_clk 0>;
>>  	clock-names = "dcu", "pix";
>>  	big-endian;
>> -	fsl,panel = <&panel>;
>>  	fsl,tcon = <&tcon>;
>> +
>> +	port: port at 0 {
> 
> Drop the unit address. With that,

I was going to say add a corresponding reg property and specify
address-cells.

So is it ok to also create a port without address?

If yes, we should probably be consistent and also not use the unit
address in patch 2/2 (since that panel also has only one port).

--
Stefan

> 
> Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh at kernel.org>
> 
>> +		dcu_out: endpoint {
>> +			remote-endpoint = <&panel_out>;
>> +		};
>> +	};
>>  };
>> --
>> 2.1.0.27.g96db324
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html