On 10/4/26 22:22, Linus Walleij wrote:
Hi Neil,
On Sun, Oct 4, 2026 at 5:51 PM Neil Armstrong <[email protected]> wrote:
Describing it in separate distincts nodes is wrong since it doesn't reflect
that it's an unified display, so either we define :
- a "combined-display" bridge defined as:
- a separate top node in / like connectors with a graph from the DSI links
to each panel
- a DSI subnode with 2 panels as subnode, port graph from both dsi to both
sub-panels
- a "R63455" panel bindings with 2 subpanels as Linus shared in
https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAD++jLkyEPY5cFg_pHb71yG52iLwS9tQDpcHu=ttbknqmef...@mail.gmail.com/
I think it would be interesting to have the "combined-display", with a
connector-like node,
which will do all the split-dsi dual-panel logic for us and leave use
implementing simple panel
drivers.
The outline would be:
Overall I really like the looks of this!
xr-display {
compatible = "combined-display";
ports {
port@0 {
combined_dsi0: endpoint {
remote-endpoint = <&dsi0_out>;
};
};
port@1 {
combined_dsi1: endpoint {
remote-endpoint = <&dsi1_out>;
};
};
port@2 {
combined_panel0: endpoint {
remote-endpoint = <&r63455_right_in>;
};
};
port@3 {
combined_panel1: endpoint {
remote-endpoint = <&r63455_left_in>;
};
};
};
};
The core of the crux is to make the argument that this node represents
the hardware and isn't just something put in there to make it easier
to implement a driver.
If I break open the headset, will I find something like this, some wires
going around in there or so.
Well you'll find 2 lens modules with embedded panels, they are separate because
they go
for each eye, since it's technically a single display for the brain. You can't
really use each panel separately, they are mounted in a specific way to be
looked
closely by human eyes.
Neil
If yes, this is a go.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
