[PATCH v2 1/4] dt-bindings: display: panel: samsung,atna33xc20: Document ATNA45AF01

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 18/07/2024 02:21, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Conor (and/or) Krzysztof and Rob,
> 
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 8:31 AM Conor Dooley <conor at kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 02:15:37PM +0200, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
>>> The Samsung ATNA45AF01 panel is an AMOLED eDP panel that has backlight
>>> control over the DP AUX channel. While it works almost correctly with the
>>> generic "edp-panel" compatible, the backlight needs special handling to
>>> work correctly. It is similar to the existing ATNA33XC20 panel, just with
>>> a larger resolution and size.
>>>
>>> Add a new "samsung,atna45af01" compatible to describe this panel in the DT.
>>> Use the existing "samsung,atna33xc20" as fallback compatible since existing
>>> drivers should work as-is, given that resolution and size are discoverable
>>> through the eDP link.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Stephan Gerhold <stephan.gerhold at linaro.org>
>>
>> Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley at microchip.com>
> 
> Can you comment on whether you would consider this bindings a "Fix"
> since it's a dependency for later patches in this series (which are
> "Fix"es) to pass dtbs_check? See:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/4bca316a-2334-425b-87a6-e1bb241d26b5@linaro.org

The patch itself is not a fix, for sure, but it might be a dependency of
a fix (which you wrote above), thus could be pulled to stable as a
dependency.

I do not care about dtbs_check warnings in stable kernels, mostly
because dtbs_check warnings depend heavily on dtschema and dtschema
follows mainline kernel. Basically if you had warnings-free v6.8 but try
to run dtbs_check now with latest dtschema, your results will differ.

At some point in the future, I could imagine "no new dtbs_check warnings
in stable kernels" requirement or at least preference, but so far I
don't think there is any benefit.

Best regards,
Krzysztof