On Lu, 2019-07-22 at 11:48 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:

On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 04:32:13PM +0300, Robert Chiras wrote:

quoted

Add new optional property 'max-res', to limit the maximum supported
resolution by the MXSFB_DRM driver.

Bindings are for h/w description, not driver config.

quoted

Signed-off-by: Robert Chiras <robert.chiras@nxp.com>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mxsfb.txt | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mxsfb.txt

b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mxsfb.txt
index 472e1ea..55e22ed 100644

--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mxsfb.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mxsfb.txt

@@ -17,6 +17,12 @@ Required properties:

 Required sub-nodes:
   - port: The connection to an encoder chip.

+Optional properties:
+- max-res:   an array with a maximum of two integers, representing
the
+             maximum supported resolution, in the form of
+             <maxX>, <maxY>; if one of the item is <0>, the
default
+             driver-defined maximum resolution for that axis is
used

I suppose what you are after is bandwidth limits? IIRC, there's
already
some bindings expressing such limits. Also, wouldn't you need to
account
for bpp and using the 2nd plane (IIRC that there is one).

I am sorry for this late reply, but I was looking after the existing
bindings expressing such limits. I didn't find such bindings related to
this driver though, I found some limits present in some other drivers.
Indeed, this limitation is actually due to bandwidth limitation, but
the problem is that this limitation comes i.MX8M (known as mScale
850D), where the memory bandwidth cannot support: GPU/VPU workload in
the same time with both DCSS driving 4k@60 and eLCDIF driving 1080p@60.
Since eLCDIF is a secondary display we though to add the posibility to
limit it's bandwidth by limiting the resolution.
Indeed, there is also a second plane, but currently not yet supported
(there is no support for second plane in MXSFB in the upstream driver
or in our internal tree).
If you think this limitation doesn't make sense, I can just drop it.

Rob

Thanks,
Robert
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel