Hello Ajay,
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Laurent Pinchart
laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com wrote:
Right. It would be great if you guys come to agreement ASAP!
I don't think we'll agree any time soon, so I believe it's up to you to decide
which option is best based on all arguments that
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas
jav...@dowhile0.org wrote:
Hello Ajay,
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Laurent Pinchart
laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com wrote:
Right. It would be great if you guys come to agreement ASAP!
I don't think we'll agree any time soon,
ping!
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 6:33 PM, Ajay kumar ajayn...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Thierry Reding
thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 05:49:24PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Hi Ajay,
On Tuesday 07 October 2014 16:06:55 Ajay kumar wrote:
On
Hi Ajay,
On Friday 10 October 2014 18:33:05 Ajay kumar wrote:
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 05:49:24PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Tuesday 07 October 2014 16:06:55 Ajay kumar wrote:
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Tomi Valkeinen
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Thierry Reding
thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 05:49:24PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Hi Ajay,
On Tuesday 07 October 2014 16:06:55 Ajay kumar wrote:
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 20/09/14 14:22, Ajay
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 05:49:24PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Hi Ajay,
On Tuesday 07 October 2014 16:06:55 Ajay kumar wrote:
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 20/09/14 14:22, Ajay kumar wrote:
Well, I am okay with using video ports to describe the
On 06/10/14 17:40, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
But seriously speaking, I was thinking about this. I'd really like to
have a generic video-mux node, that would still somehow allow us to have
device specific configurations for the video sources and sinks (which
the endpoints provide us), without
Hi Tomi,
On Tuesday 07 October 2014 10:06:10 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 06/10/14 17:40, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
But seriously speaking, I was thinking about this. I'd really like to
have a generic video-mux node, that would still somehow allow us to have
device specific configurations for
On 07/10/14 10:23, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
You mean the bridge driver would somehow take a peek into panel1 and
panel2 nodes, looking for bridge specific properties? Sounds somewhat
fragile to me... How would the bridge driver know a property is for the
bridge?
No, I mean the bridge driver
On 20/09/14 14:22, Ajay kumar wrote:
Well, I am okay with using video ports to describe the relationship
between the encoder, bridge and the panel.
But, its just that I need to make use of 2 functions when phandle
does it using just one function ;)
-panel_node =
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkei...@ti.com wrote:
On 20/09/14 14:22, Ajay kumar wrote:
Well, I am okay with using video ports to describe the relationship
between the encoder, bridge and the panel.
But, its just that I need to make use of 2 functions when phandle
Hi Ajay,
On Tuesday 07 October 2014 16:06:55 Ajay kumar wrote:
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 20/09/14 14:22, Ajay kumar wrote:
Well, I am okay with using video ports to describe the relationship
between the encoder, bridge and the panel.
But, its just that I
Hi Tomi,
On Tuesday 07 October 2014 11:25:56 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 07/10/14 10:23, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
You mean the bridge driver would somehow take a peek into panel1 and
panel2 nodes, looking for bridge specific properties? Sounds somewhat
fragile to me... How would the bridge
On 25/09/14 09:23, Thierry Reding wrote:
How are cameras different? The CPU wants to capture video data from the
camera, so it needs to go look for a video capture device, which in turn
needs to involve a sensor.
Let's say we have an XXX-to-YYY encoder. We use that encoder to convert
the
Hi Tomi and Thierry,
On Monday 06 October 2014 14:34:00 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 25/09/14 09:23, Thierry Reding wrote:
How are cameras different? The CPU wants to capture video data from the
camera, so it needs to go look for a video capture device, which in turn
needs to involve a sensor.
Hi Thierry,
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 16:49:38 Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 02:52:24PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 13:47:40 Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 01:23 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
[...]
This becomes an issue even on Linux
Hi Tomi,
On Wednesday 24 September 2014 11:42:06 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 17:45, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 02:31:35PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 12:39, Thierry Reding wrote:
My point is that if you use plain phandles you usually have the
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 12:08:37PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 17:58, Thierry Reding wrote:
But if a panel driver controls its video source, it makes sense for the
panel driver to get its video source in its probe, and that happens
easiest if the panel has a link to the video
On 09/23/2014 04:41 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 12:34:54PM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 12:10 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:43:47AM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 10:35 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
[...]
But I agree that it
On 23/09/14 17:41, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 12:34:54PM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 12:10 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:43:47AM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 10:35 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
[...]
But I agree that it would
On 23/09/14 17:45, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 02:31:35PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 12:39, Thierry Reding wrote:
My point is that if you use plain phandles you usually have the
meta-data already. Referring to the above example, bridge0 knows that it
should
On 23/09/14 17:58, Thierry Reding wrote:
But if a panel driver controls its video source, it makes sense for the
panel driver to get its video source in its probe, and that happens
easiest if the panel has a link to the video source.
That's an orthogonal problem. You speak about the link in
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 05:23:25PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 22/09/14 11:06, Thierry Reding wrote:
Why do we need a complex graph when it can be handled using a simple
phandle?
Maybe in your case you can handle it with simple phandle. Can you
guarantee that it's enough for
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Thierry Reding
thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 03:00:37AM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Monday 22 September 2014 13:35:15 Thierry Reding wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 04:53:22PM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 05:04:54PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 22/09/14 10:54, Thierry Reding wrote:
I wish all new display component bindings would use the video
ports/endpoints to describe the connections. It will be very difficult
to improve the display driver model later if we're
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:41:33AM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Thierry Reding
thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 03:00:37AM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Monday 22 September 2014 13:35:15 Thierry Reding wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at
Hi Thierry, Tomi,
On 09/23/2014 08:04 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 05:23:25PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 22/09/14 11:06, Thierry Reding wrote:
Why do we need a complex graph when it can be handled using a simple
phandle?
Maybe in your case you can handle it with
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 09:24:12AM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
Hi Thierry, Tomi,
On 09/23/2014 08:04 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 05:23:25PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 22/09/14 11:06, Thierry Reding wrote:
Why do we need a complex graph when it can be handled
On 23/09/14 08:53, Thierry Reding wrote:
Yes, it's true we need a mux there. But we still have the complication
that for panel0 we may need different ps8622 settings than for panel1.
Yes, and that's why the bridge should be querying the panel for the
information it needs to determine the
On 23/09/14 09:04, Thierry Reding wrote:
I certainly agree that it's useful to have standard ways to describe at
least various aspects. For example I think it would be useful to add
standard properties for a bridge's connections, such as bridge or
panel to allow bridge chaining and attaching
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:41:52AM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 08:53, Thierry Reding wrote:
Yes, it's true we need a mux there. But we still have the complication
that for panel0 we may need different ps8622 settings than for panel1.
Yes, and that's why the bridge should
On 23/09/14 09:21, Thierry Reding wrote:
Well, I can write almost any kind of bindings, and then evidently my
device would work. For me, on my board.
Well, that's the whole problem with DT. For many devices we only have a
single setup to test against. And even when we have several they
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:54:27AM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 09:04, Thierry Reding wrote:
I certainly agree that it's useful to have standard ways to describe at
least various aspects. For example I think it would be useful to add
standard properties for a bridge's
On 23/09/14 11:35, Thierry Reding wrote:
Well, a display controller is never going to attach to a panel directly.
With parallel RGB, that (almost) happens. There's voltage level shifting
probably in the middle, but I don't see anything else there.
But I agree that it would be nice to unify
On 09/23/2014 10:35 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 09:24:12AM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
Hi Thierry, Tomi,
On 09/23/2014 08:04 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 05:23:25PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 22/09/14 11:06, Thierry Reding wrote:
Why do we
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 12:30:20PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 09:21, Thierry Reding wrote:
Well, I can write almost any kind of bindings, and then evidently my
device would work. For me, on my board.
Well, that's the whole problem with DT. For many devices we only have a
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 12:40:24PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 11:35, Thierry Reding wrote:
Well, a display controller is never going to attach to a panel directly.
With parallel RGB, that (almost) happens. There's voltage level shifting
probably in the middle, but I don't
On 09/23/2014 11:30 AM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 09:21, Thierry Reding wrote:
Well, I can write almost any kind of bindings, and then evidently my
device would work. For me, on my board.
Well, that's the whole problem with DT. For many devices we only have a
single setup to test
On 09/23/2014 11:30 AM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 09:21, Thierry Reding wrote:
Well, I can write almost any kind of bindings, and then evidently my
device would work. For me, on my board.
Well, that's the whole problem with DT. For many devices we only have a
single setup to test
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:43:47AM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 10:35 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
[...]
But I agree that it would be nice to unify bridges and encoders more. It
should be possible to make encoder always a bridge (or perhaps even
replace encoders with bridges
On 09/23/2014 12:10 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:43:47AM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 10:35 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
[...]
But I agree that it would be nice to unify bridges and encoders more. It
should be possible to make encoder always a bridge (or
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 12:02:45 Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 11:30 AM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 09:21, Thierry Reding wrote:
Well, I can write almost any kind of bindings, and then evidently my
device would work. For me, on my board.
Well, that's the whole problem
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 11:53:15 Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 12:30:20PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 09:21, Thierry Reding wrote:
Well, I can write almost any kind of bindings, and then evidently my
device would work. For me, on my board.
Well,
On 23/09/14 12:28, Thierry Reding wrote:
But, for example, let's say that the board is designed in a way that for
panel0 the bridge needs to output a bit higher level voltages than for
panel1. That's not a property of the panel, so it can't be queried from
the panel.
That feature (varying
On 09/23/2014 01:10 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 12:02:45 Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 11:30 AM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 09:21, Thierry Reding wrote:
Well, I can write almost any kind of bindings, and then evidently my
device would work. For me, on
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 13:18:30 Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 01:10 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 12:02:45 Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 11:30 AM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 09:21, Thierry Reding wrote:
Well, I can write almost any kind of
On 23/09/14 12:39, Thierry Reding wrote:
My point is that if you use plain phandles you usually have the
meta-data already. Referring to the above example, bridge0 knows that it
should look for a bridge with phandle bridge1, whereas bridge1 knows
that the device it is connected to is a panel.
Hi Thierry,
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 12:10:33 Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:43:47AM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 10:35 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
[...]
But I agree that it would be nice to unify bridges and encoders more. It
should be possible to
On 09/23/2014 01:23 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 13:18:30 Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 01:10 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 12:02:45 Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 11:30 AM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 09:21, Thierry Reding
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 13:47:40 Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 01:23 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 13:18:30 Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 01:10 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 12:02:45 Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014
On 23/09/14 12:53, Thierry Reding wrote:
Yes, but in this case we know of existing boards that have complex
setups. It's not theoretical.
Complex setups involving /this particular/ bridge and binding are
theoretical at this point, however.
Right, but this discussion, at least from my part,
On 23/09/14 13:01, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 12:40:24PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 11:35, Thierry Reding wrote:
Well, a display controller is never going to attach to a panel directly.
With parallel RGB, that (almost) happens. There's voltage level shifting
On 09/23/2014 01:52 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 13:47:40 Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 01:23 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 13:18:30 Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 01:10 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2014
On 09/23/2014 01:52 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 13:47:40 Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 01:23 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 13:18:30 Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 01:10 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2014
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 02:15:54PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 12:28, Thierry Reding wrote:
But, for example, let's say that the board is designed in a way that for
panel0 the bridge needs to output a bit higher level voltages than for
panel1. That's not a property of the
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 03:09:44PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 13:01, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 12:40:24PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
[...]
What exactly is a bridge and what is an encoder? Those are DRM
constructs, aren't they?
Yes. I think bridges
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 12:34:54PM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 12:10 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:43:47AM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 10:35 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
[...]
But I agree that it would be nice to unify bridges and encoders
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 02:31:35PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 12:39, Thierry Reding wrote:
My point is that if you use plain phandles you usually have the
meta-data already. Referring to the above example, bridge0 knows that it
should look for a bridge with phandle bridge1,
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 02:12:52PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 11:53:15 Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 12:30:20PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 09:21, Thierry Reding wrote:
Well, I can write almost any kind of bindings, and then
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 02:52:24PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 13:47:40 Andrzej Hajda wrote:
On 09/23/2014 01:23 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
[...]
This becomes an issue even on Linux when considering video-related devices
that can be part of either a
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 03:00:31PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 12:53, Thierry Reding wrote:
Yes, but in this case we know of existing boards that have complex
setups. It's not theoretical.
Complex setups involving /this particular/ bridge and binding are
theoretical at
On 23/09/14 17:29, Thierry Reding wrote:
Trying to do this within the bridge's node directly has two flaws:
1) It violates the DT principle of describing hardware. The
device itself does not know anything about multiple streams
and deals only with a single input and output.
On 23/09/14 17:38, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 03:09:44PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/09/14 13:01, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 12:40:24PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
[...]
What exactly is a bridge and what is an encoder? Those are DRM
constructs,
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas
jav...@dowhile0.org wrote:
[adding Kukjin as cc]
Hello Ajay,
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Ajay kumar ajayn...@gmail.com wrote:
Generally speaking, I sense that we have different views of how display
devices and drivers are
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 02:52:42PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 27/08/14 17:39, Ajay Kumar wrote:
Add documentation for DT properties supported by ps8622/ps8625
eDP-LVDS converter.
Signed-off-by: Ajay Kumar ajaykumar...@samsung.com
---
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 07:22:05PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 17/09/14 17:29, Ajay kumar wrote:
Hi Tomi,
Thanks for your comments.
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkei...@ti.com
wrote:
On 27/08/14 17:39, Ajay Kumar wrote:
Add documentation for DT
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:20:40AM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
Hi Tomi,
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkei...@ti.com wrote:
On 17/09/14 17:29, Ajay kumar wrote:
Hi Tomi,
Thanks for your comments.
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Tomi Valkeinen
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 05:28:37PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 19/09/14 16:59, Ajay kumar wrote:
I am not really able to understand, what's stopping us from using this
bridge on a board with complex display connections. To use ps8622 driver,
one needs to attach it to the DRM
Hi Thierry,
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Thierry Reding
thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:20:40AM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
Hi Tomi,
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkei...@ti.com
wrote:
On 17/09/14 17:29, Ajay kumar wrote:
Hi Tomi,
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 02:01:38PM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
Hi Thierry,
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Thierry Reding
thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:20:40AM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
Hi Tomi,
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Tomi Valkeinen
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Thierry Reding
thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 02:01:38PM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
Hi Thierry,
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Thierry Reding
thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:20:40AM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 04:53:22PM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Thierry Reding
thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 02:01:38PM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
Hi Thierry,
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Thierry Reding
thierry.red...@gmail.com
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Thierry Reding
thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 04:53:22PM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Thierry Reding
thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 02:01:38PM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
Hi Thierry,
On 22/09/14 10:54, Thierry Reding wrote:
I wish all new display component bindings would use the video
ports/endpoints to describe the connections. It will be very difficult
to improve the display driver model later if we're missing such critical
pieces from the DT bindings.
I disagree.
On 22/09/14 11:06, Thierry Reding wrote:
Why do we need a complex graph when it can be handled using a simple
phandle?
Maybe in your case you can handle it with simple phandle. Can you
guarantee that it's enough for everyone, on all platforms?
Nobody can guarantee that. An interesting
On 22/09/14 11:26, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 05:28:37PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 19/09/14 16:59, Ajay kumar wrote:
I am not really able to understand, what's stopping us from using this
bridge on a board with complex display connections. To use ps8622 driver,
one
On 20/09/14 18:27, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
I see that Documentation/devicetree/bindings/video/ti,omap-dss.txt
mentions that the Video Ports binding documentation is in
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/video/video-ports.txt but I don't
see that this file exists in the kernel [1]. I
On Monday 22 September 2014 13:35:15 Thierry Reding wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 04:53:22PM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 02:01:38PM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 05:42:41PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 22/09/14 11:26, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 05:28:37PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 19/09/14 16:59, Ajay kumar wrote:
I am not really able to understand, what's stopping us from using this
bridge on
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 03:00:37AM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Monday 22 September 2014 13:35:15 Thierry Reding wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 04:53:22PM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 02:01:38PM +0530, Ajay
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkei...@ti.com wrote:
On 19/09/14 16:59, Ajay kumar wrote:
I am not really able to understand, what's stopping us from using this
bridge on a board with complex display connections. To use ps8622 driver,
one needs to attach it to the DRM
[adding Kukjin as cc]
Hello Ajay,
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Ajay kumar ajayn...@gmail.com wrote:
Generally speaking, I sense that we have different views of how display
devices and drivers are structured. You say If some XYZ platform wishes
to pick the DT node via a different method,
On 18/09/14 08:50, Ajay kumar wrote:
Why do we need a complex graph when it can be handled using a simple
phandle?
Maybe in your case you can handle it with simple phandle. Can you
guarantee that it's enough for everyone, on all platforms?
Yes, as of now exynos5420-peach-pit and
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkei...@ti.com wrote:
On 18/09/14 08:50, Ajay kumar wrote:
Why do we need a complex graph when it can be handled using a simple
phandle?
Maybe in your case you can handle it with simple phandle. Can you
guarantee that it's enough for
On 19/09/14 16:59, Ajay kumar wrote:
I am not really able to understand, what's stopping us from using this
bridge on a board with complex display connections. To use ps8622 driver,
one needs to attach it to the DRM framework. For this, the DRM driver
Remember that when we talk about DT
On 27/08/14 17:39, Ajay Kumar wrote:
Add documentation for DT properties supported by ps8622/ps8625
eDP-LVDS converter.
Signed-off-by: Ajay Kumar ajaykumar...@samsung.com
---
.../devicetree/bindings/video/bridge/ps8622.txt| 20
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
Hi Tomi,
Thanks for your comments.
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkei...@ti.com wrote:
On 27/08/14 17:39, Ajay Kumar wrote:
Add documentation for DT properties supported by ps8622/ps8625
eDP-LVDS converter.
Signed-off-by: Ajay Kumar ajaykumar...@samsung.com
---
On 17/09/14 17:29, Ajay kumar wrote:
Hi Tomi,
Thanks for your comments.
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkei...@ti.com wrote:
On 27/08/14 17:39, Ajay Kumar wrote:
Add documentation for DT properties supported by ps8622/ps8625
eDP-LVDS converter.
Signed-off-by:
Hi Tomi,
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkei...@ti.com wrote:
On 17/09/14 17:29, Ajay kumar wrote:
Hi Tomi,
Thanks for your comments.
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkei...@ti.com
wrote:
On 27/08/14 17:39, Ajay Kumar wrote:
Add
89 matches
Mail list logo
