Re: [PATCH 6/9] dt-bindings: media: snps,dw-hdmi-rx: make hpd-gpios optional

["Sascha Hauer" <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>]

On 2026-09-23 17:46, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2026 at 03:44:45PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > hpd-gpios is the +5V line of the HDMI connector, which the source drives
> > to announce itself. On a board whose HDMI connector belongs to a bridge
> > placed in front of this receiver, that line goes to the bridge and there
> > is nothing for the receiver to sense, so the property cannot be
> > provided.
> > 
> > Drop it from the required list and describe what it actually carries.
> > The name is unfortunate: the hot plug detect line the receiver drives
> > back at the source is a controller register, not this GPIO.
> > 
> > Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-5
> > Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/snps,dw-hdmi-rx.yaml | 8 ++++++--
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/snps,dw-hdmi-rx.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/snps,dw-hdmi-rx.yaml
> > index 7e66dcbdfe2cb..9c6c377417c0b 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/snps,dw-hdmi-rx.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/snps,dw-hdmi-rx.yaml
> > @@ -63,7 +63,12 @@ properties:
> >      maxItems: 1
> >  
> >    hpd-gpios:
> > -    description: GPIO specifier for HPD.
> > +    description:
> > +      The +5V line of the HDMI connector, which the source drives to announce
> > +      itself. Despite the name this is an input to the receiver; the hot plug
> > +      detect line the receiver drives back at the source is handled inside the
> > +      controller. Absent when the connector belongs to a bridge in front of
> > +      this receiver rather than to the receiver itself.
> >      maxItems: 1
> >  
> >    port:
> > @@ -96,7 +101,6 @@ required:
> >    - power-domains
> >    - resets
> >    - pinctrl-0
> > -  - hpd-gpios
> 
> Would it be a good idea to require either this or ports, rather than
> remove it? Just to keep the coverage up since I assume the feature is
> required without the bridge. Perhaps that's not the case and this is
> genuinely not needed.

Yes, makes sense. One or the other should be required. Will change next
round.

Sascha

--
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Steuerwalder Str. 21                       | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany                  | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |