On 22-09-21, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

On 20/09/2022 19:32, Laurent Pinchart wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

Explicit bus types in DT indeed makes it easier for drivers, so if a
device can support multiple bus types (even if not implemented yet in
the corresponding drivers), the property should be there.

Okay, I will make it required.

quoted

quoted

Why do you have hsync-active and vsync-active if both are always zero? Can
the hardware not support other configuration?

Sure the device supports toggling the logic but it is not implemented.
So the bindings needs to enforce it to 0 right now. As soon as it is
implemented & tested, we can say that both is supported :)

Bindings are not supposed to be limited by the existing driver
implementation, so you can already allow both polarities, and just
reject the unsupported options in the driver at probe time. Future
updates to the driver won't require a binding change.

+1

I don't wanna do that because this let the binding user assume that
this mode is already supported. Adapting a binding is just 1 commit and
since the property is already existing, there is no breaking change.

Regards,
  Marco

-- 
linux-phy mailing list
linux-phy@lists.infradead.org
https://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-phy