On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 3:35 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
> This entire binding seems like stitching two devices together, which > might be fine (I don't even remember this stuff... two months old) or > might be artificial grouping of separate devices. I think that's a good point and fair pushback. Neil and Jun talk about it yesterday at XDC (1:15 into the stream): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tNGW8PoSzw The current binding does not reflect the physical topology of the actual device, and the bindings need improvements. I have a feeling there is one display controller with two physical panels. In that case I think it's better if we do: panel: panel@0 { /* This is the two-panel package with one display controller */ compatible = "sharp,ls026b3sa06", "synaptics,r63455"; reg = <0>; #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; panel@0 { reset-gpios = <&pm8550_gpios 3 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; reg = <0>; .... }; panel@1 { reset-gpios = <&pm8550_gpios 11 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; reg = <1>; .... }; ... }; Yours, Linus Walleij
