[PATCH v2 1/5] dt-bindings: display: rk3588-dw-hdmi-qp: Add tmds-enable-gpios property

[Laurent Pinchart]

On Mon, Oct 06, 2025 at 07:42:56PM +0300, Cristian Ciocaltea wrote:
> On 10/6/25 7:25 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 06, 2025 at 02:19:24PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> >> On Mon, Oct 06, 2025 at 02:55:37AM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> >>> From: Cristian Ciocaltea <cristian.ciocaltea at collabora.com>
> >>>
> >>> Add an optional property to RK3588 HDMI TX Controller binding describing
> >>> a GPIO line to be asserted when operating in HDMI 1.4/2.0 TMDS mode and
> >>> deasserted for HDMI 2.1 FRL.
> >>>
> >>> This is used to control an external level shifter for HDMI data lines.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Cristian Ciocaltea <cristian.ciocaltea at collabora.com>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart at ideasonboard.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>  .../display/rockchip/rockchip,rk3588-dw-hdmi-qp.yaml   | 10 ++++++++++
> >>>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/rockchip,rk3588-dw-hdmi-qp.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/rockchip,rk3588-dw-hdmi-qp.yaml
> >>> index 96b4b088eebe..eec0d40c91ea 100644
> >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/rockchip,rk3588-dw-hdmi-qp.yaml
> >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/rockchip,rk3588-dw-hdmi-qp.yaml
> >>> @@ -113,6 +113,13 @@ properties:
> >>>      description:
> >>>        Additional HDMI QP related data is accessed through VO GRF regs.
> >>>  
> >>> +  tmds-enable-gpios:
> >>> +    description:
> >>> +      Optional GPIO line to be asserted when operating in HDMI 1.4/2.0
> >>> +      TMDS mode and deasserted for HDMI 2.1 FRL. It can be used to control
> >>> +      an external level shifter for HDMI data lines.
> >>> +    maxItems: 1
> >>
> >> Just my 2c: since TMDS is assumed to be a default mode, shouldn't this
> >> be a frl-enable-gpios instead?
> > 
> > I don't mind either way. Cristian, any opinion ?
> 
> No strong opinion either; we could go for Dmitry's suggestion.

OK, I'll flip it.

> >>> +
> >>>  required:
> >>>    - compatible
> >>>    - reg

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart