[RFC PATCHv2 2/9] dt-bindings: display/ti: add k2g-dss bindings

[Laurent Pinchart]

Hi Tomi,

Thank you for the patch.

On Monday, 18 June 2018 16:22:35 EEST Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> Add DT bindings for Texas Instruments K2G SoC Display Subsystem. The DSS
> is quite simple, with a single plane and a single output.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen at ti.com>
> Cc: devicetree at vger.kernel.org
> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh at kernel.org>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/display/ti/ti,k2g-dss.txt | 15 +++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ti/ti,k2g-dss.txt
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ti/ti,k2g-dss.txt
> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ti/ti,k2g-dss.txt new file mode
> 100644
> index 000000000000..1af11425eda3
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ti/ti,k2g-dss.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
> +Texas Instruments K2G Display Subsystem
> +=======================================
> +
> +Required properties:
> +- compatible: "ti,k2g-dss"
> +- reg: address and length of the register spaces for DSS submodules
> +- reg-names: "cfg", "common", "vid1", "ovr1", "vp1"

When seeing multiple register ranges for a DT node I always suspect that we 
describe multiple IP cores that could be better modeled as independent nodes. 
What prompted you not to model the DISPC as a separate DT node (possibly a 
child of the DSS DT node) ?

Furthermore, "cfg" corresponds to the DSS registers, so I wonder whether it 
shouldn't be named "dss". Similarly, "common" really sounds like DSS common 
registers, while it relates to the DISPC.

> +- clocks: phandle to fclk and vp1 clocks
> +- clock-names: "fck", "vp1"
> +- interrupts: phandle to the DISPC interrupt
> +
> +The DSS outputs are described using the device graphs as documented in
> +Documentation/devicetree/bindings/graph.txt. K2G DSS has a single DPI
> output as
> +port 0.

Both SPRUHY8H and SPRSP07D document a DPI output and a DBI output. Am I 
looking at the wrong document ?

> +

Extra blank line ?

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart