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

Reply via email to