On Fri, Mar 06, 2026 at 09:46:57AM +0100, Marco Felsch wrote: > On 26-03-06, Liu Ying wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 04, 2026 at 11:34:10AM +0000, Laurentiu Palcu wrote: > > > i.MX94 has a single LVDS port and share similar LDB and LVDS control > > > registers as i.MX8MP and i.MX93. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Laurentiu Palcu <[email protected]> > > > Reviewed-by: Frank Li <[email protected]> > > > Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/fsl,ldb.yaml | 2 ++ > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git > > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/fsl,ldb.yaml > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/fsl,ldb.yaml > > > index 7f380879fffdf..fb70409161fc0 100644 > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/fsl,ldb.yaml > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/fsl,ldb.yaml > > > @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ properties: > > > - fsl,imx6sx-ldb > > > - fsl,imx8mp-ldb > > > - fsl,imx93-ldb > > > + - fsl,imx94-ldb > > > > Cc'ing Marco. > > > > Recently, Marco said that LDB node should not have a reg property... > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/4sofljffovrorpxe2os3jl745qfjoglvl54oqf3v7r5bk5f6aq@6y3jwn4abiqy/ > > Yes, this has to be dropped. All variants of this specific "IP" use the > same approach. This "IP" is part of a general purpose register layout > with very loose reg-field definitions: e.g. resets and clk-gatting share > the same register. Or a mux reg-field shares the same register as a > MIPI-{C,D}SI configuration reg-field. Therefore this "IP" is part of a > syscon and should be abstracted as such within the DT.
Even though I understand the logic behind why 'reg' should be dropped, I'm not exactly sure how to proceed with this. It appears Marek made the 'reg' required in this commit (merely 2 months ago): 8aa2f0ac08d3b - dt-bindings: display: bridge: ldb: Add check for reg and reg-names Should the above patch simply be reverted and have 'reg' as optional again? Or should the 'reg' and 'reg-names' be removed completely from the binding. @Marek, any comments? -- Thanks, Laurentiu
