[PATCH 1/9] dt-bindings: mfd: Add bindings for SAM9X7 LCD controller

[Conor Dooley]

On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 04:40:50PM +0200, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> On 13/06/2023 at 20:21, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 08:17:13PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 13/06/2023 09:04, Manikandan Muralidharan wrote:
> > > > Add new compatible string for the XLCD controller on SAM9X7 SoC.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Manikandan Muralidharan<manikandan.m at microchip.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt | 1 +
> > > >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt
> > > > index 5f8880cc757e..7c77b6bf4adb 100644
> > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt
> > > > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ Required properties:
> > > >      "atmel,sama5d3-hlcdc"
> > > >      "atmel,sama5d4-hlcdc"
> > > >      "microchip,sam9x60-hlcdc"
> > > > +   "microchip,sam9x7-xlcdc"
> > > Google says sam9x7 is a series, not a SoC. Please add compatibles for
> > > specific SoCs, not for series.
> > We had this one a few weeks ago, see
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/add5e49e-8416-ba9f-819a-da944938c05f@microchip.com/
> > and its parents. Outcome of that seemed to be that using "sam9x7" was fine.
> 
> And it's where it begins to be funny, as the LCD is precisely one aspect
> where we differentiate between sam9x75, sam9x72 and sam9x70...

Oh dear, just my luck...

> So please Manikandan sort this out if difference between these chips will be
> better handled with different compatibility string, in particular about //,
> LVDS and MIPI-DSI variants!

Yeah, providing some information about what the differences actually are
would be good, for the same of the actually-knowledgeable-about-displays
folk in the audience (IOW, not me).
Probably then the display/atmel/hlcdc-dc.txt binding needs an update too?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20230614/d70074ff/attachment-0001.sig>