On 07/03/14 16:17, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
> On 03/07/2014 02:28 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> (...)
>> There are many possible connections from FIMD, some of them:
>> FIMD ---> RGB panel, external
>> FIMD ---> DSI, on SoC
>> FIMD ---> eDP, on SoC
>> FIMD ---> ImageEnhacer, on SoC
>> This sounds similar
On 07/03/14 15:07, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
> On 03/07/2014 01:32 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>> On 07/03/14 14:22, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
>>
>>> I think we should even extend the bindings to fimd:
>>> dsi {
>>> port at 0 {
>>> dsi_0: endpoint {
>>> remote-endpoint=<&fimd_0>;
>>>
On 03/07/2014 02:28 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
(...)
> There are many possible connections from FIMD, some of them:
> FIMD ---> RGB panel, external
> FIMD ---> DSI, on SoC
> FIMD ---> eDP, on SoC
> FIMD ---> ImageEnhacer, on SoC
> This sounds similar to OMAP, at least roughly.
>
>> In the first case
On 07/03/14 14:22, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
> I think we should even extend the bindings to fimd:
> dsi {
> port at 0 {
> dsi_0: endpoint {
> remote-endpoint=<&fimd_0>;
> }
> }
> port at 1 {
> dsi_1: endpoint {
> remote-endpoint=<&lvds_0>;
>
On 03/07/2014 01:32 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> On 07/03/14 14:22, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
>
>> I think we should even extend the bindings to fimd:
>> dsi {
>> port at 0 {
>> dsi_0: endpoint {
>> remote-endpoint=<&fimd_0>;
>> }
>> }
>> port at 1 {
>> dsi
On 03/05/2014 01:06 PM, Inki Dae wrote:
> Sorry for interrupting,
>
>
> 2014-03-04 21:00 GMT+09:00 Andrzej Hajda :
>> On 02/28/2014 02:39 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>>> On 28/02/14 15:31, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>>>
Compared to what I've done on OMAP, you don't seem to specify the video
inpu
Sorry for interrupting,
2014-03-04 21:00 GMT+09:00 Andrzej Hajda :
> On 02/28/2014 02:39 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>> On 28/02/14 15:31, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>>
>>> Compared to what I've done on OMAP, you don't seem to specify the video
>>> inputs for the tc358764 at all. In this case it's obvio
On 04/03/14 14:00, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
> I have made video path binding optional, in case of video bus
> if the specific video path is not present driver uses the bus it is
> connected to.
> In case DSI panel is controlled via different bus the path should be
> specified
> explicitly.
>
> I have
On 02/28/2014 02:39 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> On 28/02/14 15:31, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>
>> Compared to what I've done on OMAP, you don't seem to specify the video
>> inputs for the tc358764 at all. In this case it's obvious, as the chip
>> is a child of the DSI master. But the chip could as well
On 28/02/14 15:31, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> Compared to what I've done on OMAP, you don't seem to specify the video
> inputs for the tc358764 at all. In this case it's obvious, as the chip
> is a child of the DSI master. But the chip could as well be controlled
> via i2c, and so be placed as a chil
On 12/02/14 13:31, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
> The patch adds bridge and panel nodes.
> It adds also DSI properties specific for arndale board.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrzej Hajda
> ---
> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-arndale.dts | 39
>
> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+
The patch adds bridge and panel nodes.
It adds also DSI properties specific for arndale board.
Signed-off-by: Andrzej Hajda
---
arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-arndale.dts | 39
1 file changed, 39 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-arndale.dts
12 matches
Mail list logo
