Re: Tegra DRM device tree bindings

[Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 06/26/2012 11:07 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 04:48:14PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
...
> I actually like what you proposed above a lot, so if you don't
> mind either way I'll go with that proposal. Keeping the connector
> nodes as children of the outputs has the advantage of being able to
> reference them if we need it at some point. But it is also
> redundant in that a single output doesn't usually (never?) driver
> more than one connector.

Yes, I believe that each output is 1:1 with (the video portion of) a
connector. The display controllers obviously aren't 1:1.

> The same issue will have to be addressed for the CSI and VI nodes,
> but as I currently use neither of those I don't feel qualified to
> propose a binding for them. Also for the VI part we're completely
> missing documentation. Maybe somebody could push this to be
> released as well?

I did file a bug noting the request for VI documentation. At this
point in time, it's too early to say what, if anything, will come of that.

> If I understand correctly, most of the host1x children can also be 
> chained in a processing pipeline to do postprocessing an video
> input for example. I suppose that's generic and doesn't need to be
> represented in DT either, right?

Yes, I believe that's something internal to the driver.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html