Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] dt-bindings: drm/bridge: Document Cadence DSI bridge bindings
From: Andrzej Hajda <hidden>
Date: 2017-09-01 06:28:13
Also in:
dri-devel
On 31.08.2017 17:55, Boris Brezillon wrote:
quoted hunk
Document the bindings used for the Cadence DSI bridge. Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon-wi1+55ScJUtKEb57/3fJTNBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org> --- Changes in v3: - Fix clock names in the example - Document how to represent DSI devices that are controller through an external bus like I2C or SPI Changes in v2: - None --- .../bindings/display/bridge/cdns,dsi.txt | 109 +++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 109 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/cdns,dsi.txtdiff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/cdns,dsi.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/cdns,dsi.txt new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..c70008bd8c0d --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/cdns,dsi.txt@@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +Cadence DSI bridge +================== + +The Cadence DSI bridge is a DPI to DSI bridge supporting up to 4 DSI lanes. + +Required properties: +- compatible: should be set to "cdns,dsi-1.3.1". +- reg: physical base address and length of the controller's registers. +- interrupts: interrupt line connected to the DSI bridge. +- clocks: DSI bridge clocks. +- clock-names: must contain "pclk" and "sysclk". +- phys: phandle link to the MIPI D-PHY controller. +- phy-names: must contain "dphy". +- #address-cells: must be set to 1. +- #size-cells: must be set to 0. + +Required subnodes: +- ports: Ports as described in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/graph.txt. + 2 ports are available: + * port 0: this port is only needed if some of your DSI devices are + controlled through an external bus like I2C or SPI. Can have at + most 4 endpoints. The endpoint number is directly encoding the + DSI virtual channel used by this device. + * port 1: represents the DPI input. + Other ports will be added later to support the new kind of inputs.
I think usual practice is to use lower numbers for input ports, higher for output ports. Is there a reason to do it this way? Regards Andrzej
+
+- one subnode per DSI device connected on the DSI bus. Each DSI device should
+ contain a reg property encoding its virtual channel.
+
+Example:
+
+ dsi0: dsi@fd0c0000 {
+ compatible = "cdns,dsi-1.3.1";
+ reg = <0x0 0xfd0c0000 0x0 0x1000>;
+ clocks = <&pclk>, <&sysclk>;
+ clock-names = "pclk", "sysclk";
+ interrupts = <1>;
+ phys = <&dphy1>;
+ phy-names = "dphy";
+ #address-cells = <1>;
+ #size-cells = <0>;
+
+ ports {
+ #address-cells = <1>;
+ #size-cells = <0>;
+
+ port@1 {
+ reg = <1>;
+ dsi0_dpi_input: endpoint {
+ remote-endpoint = <&xxx_dpi_output>;
+ };
+ };
+ };
+
+ panel: dsi-dev@0 {
+ compatible = "<vendor,panel>";
+ reg = <0>;
+ };
+ };
+
+or
+
+ dsi0: dsi@fd0c0000 {
+ compatible = "cdns,dsi";
+ reg = <0x0 0xfd0c0000 0x0 0x1000>;
+ clocks = <&pclk>, <&sysclk>;
+ clock-names = "pclk", "sysclk";
+ interrupts = <1>;
+ phys = <&dphy1>;
+ phy-names = "dphy";
+ #address-cells = <1>;
+ #size-cells = <0>;
+
+ ports {
+ #address-cells = <1>;
+ #size-cells = <0>;
+
+ port@0 {
+ reg = <0>;
+ #address-cells = <1>;
+ #size-cells = <0>;
+
+ dsi0_output: endpoint@0 {
+ reg = <0>;
+ remote-endpoint = <&dsi_panel_input>;
+ };
+ };
+
+ port@1 {
+ reg = <1>;
+ dsi0_dpi_input: endpoint {
+ remote-endpoint = <&xxx_dpi_output>;
+ };
+ };
+ };
+ };
+
+ i2c@xxx {
+ panel: panel@59 {
+ compatible = "<vendor,panel>";
+ reg = <0x59>;
+
+ port {
+ dsi_panel_input: endpoint {
+ remote-endpoint = <&dsi0_output>;
+ };
+ };
+ };
+ };-- 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