Thread (2 messages) 2 messages, 2 authors, 2014-03-10

Re: [PATCH 0/9] Doc/DT: DT bindings for various display components

From: Rob Herring <hidden>
Date: 2014-03-10 16:05:40
Also in: dri-devel, linux-arm-kernel, linux-fbdev

Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)

On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 2:04 AM, Tomi Valkeinen [off-list ref] wrote:
Hi Rob, Pawel, Mark, Ian, Kumar,

On 28/02/14 18:56, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
quoted
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 06:48:35PM +0200, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
quoted
This is totally unclear to me. How does it become a public standard?
What's the forum for this?
Me too.  That's where I'd hope someone on devicetree-discuss will be
able to help us work out what's the right approach here. :)
The story briefly so far: I've implemented DT support for OMAP display,
and created bindings for various (non-OMAP) display components,
including generic connector bindings for DVI, HDMI and analog-tv.

Russell's point was that these connector bindings are very generic, i.e.
they are not for any particular chip from a particular vendor, but for
any connector for DVI, HDMI or analog-tv. And he's worried that maybe we
shouldn't define such generic bindings without consulting the whole
device-tree community (i.e including non-linux users).
So re-work it to be generic and send it out. DT maintainers would
rarely disagree that something shouldn't be made generic.
So the question is, is there such a community and a forum to bring up
this kind of things? If yes, should we bring this up there? If yes, what
kind of things in general should be brought into the attention of
non-linux users?
devicetree list is just that. It is not just for Linux. There is the
newly created devicetree-spec-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org which is for more
core/common binding discussion.
What I wonder here is that while a thing like DVI connector is, of
course, more generic than, say, "ti,tfp410" encoder chip, but isn't the
case still the same: we're defining global bindings for hardware that
should work for everyone, not only Linux users?
Defining the connectors in DT is a useful thing although mainly when
you have multiple connectors of the same type. Labels for composite,
SVideo, VGA, DVI, HDMI seem less useful to me. Describing position or
printed label (like front vs. rear connections) seem more useful to
me.

Rob
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help