On Thursday 27 February 2014 16:10:41 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 27/02/14 15:43, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
That may be - but the problem with CDF solving this problem is that it's
wrong. It's fixing what is in actual fact a *generic* problem in a much
too specific way. To put it
On 25/02/14 16:23, Philipp Zabel wrote:
+Freescale i.MX DRM master device
+
+
+The freescale i.MX DRM master device is a virtual device needed to list all
+IPU or other display interface nodes that comprise the graphics subsystem.
+
+Required properties:
+-
Am Donnerstag, den 27.02.2014, 13:06 +0200 schrieb Tomi Valkeinen:
On 25/02/14 16:23, Philipp Zabel wrote:
+Freescale i.MX DRM master device
+
+
+The freescale i.MX DRM master device is a virtual device needed to list all
+IPU or other display interface
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 02:06:25PM +0100, Philipp Zabel wrote:
For the i.MX6 display subsystem there is no clear single master device,
and the physical configuration changes across the SoC family. The
i.MX6Q/i.MX6D SoCs have two separate display controller devices IPU1 and
IPU2, with two
On 27/02/14 13:56, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
Is there even need for such a master device? You can find all the
connected display devices from any single display device, by just
following the endpoint links.
Please read up on what has been discussed over previous years:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 03:16:03PM +0200, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 27/02/14 13:56, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
Is there even need for such a master device? You can find all the
connected display devices from any single display device, by just
following the endpoint links.
Please
On 27/02/14 15:00, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 02:06:25PM +0100, Philipp Zabel wrote:
For the i.MX6 display subsystem there is no clear single master device,
and the physical configuration changes across the SoC family. The
i.MX6Q/i.MX6D SoCs have two separate
On 27/02/14 15:43, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
That may be - but the problem with CDF solving this problem is that it's
wrong. It's fixing what is in actual fact a *generic* problem in a much
too specific way. To put it another way, it's forcing everyone to fix
the same problem in their
On 27/02/14 18:54, Philipp Zabel wrote:
- One IPU enabled, one disabled: nothing special here, just set the
other IPU to status=disabled in the DT data. The driver for the
enabled IPU would register the required DRM entities.
that should work. Let the enabled IPU create the imx-drm platform
This patch updates the device tree binding documentation for i.MX IPU/display
nodes using the OF graph bindings documented in
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/video-interfaces.txt.
Signed-off-by: Philipp Zabel p.za...@pengutronix.de
---
.../bindings/staging/imx-drm/fsl-imx-drm.txt |
10 matches
Mail list logo