From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/19] tegra: fdt: Add LCD definitions for Tegra Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 17:32:45 -0600 Message-ID: <4FDA749D.2030201@wwwdotorg.org> References: <1339604395-6621-1-git-send-email-sjg@chromium.org> <1339604395-6621-8-git-send-email-sjg@chromium.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1339604395-6621-8-git-send-email-sjg@chromium.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Errors-To: u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de To: Simon Glass Cc: Devicetree Discuss , U-Boot Mailing List , Jerry Van Baren , Tom Warren List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 06/13/2012 10:19 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Add LCD definitions and also a proposed binding for LCD displays. > > The PWFM is in progress on the device-tree-discuss list, so only a > very basic binding is offered here. I believe we have settled on a final representation, it just hasn't been added into linux-next yet. See: http://gitorious.org/linux-pwm/linux-pwm/commit/d3ce73e5dc86646a6302f2b0f7dd40e8c552fa04 > I am not sure if it is better to have the lcd within the display > controller as with i2c/spi, or a separate node. From a hardware point > of view the LCD is certainly connected to the display controller, so > perhaps this version makes most sense. We could have a stand-alone > top-level lcd node with a phandle pointing to the display controller, > but these doesn't seem to be an obvious advantage to that approach. Equally, there's been extensive discussion re: how to represent the NVIDIA display controller in DT. I strongly believe that U-Boot shouldn't go ahead in isolation with a binding that's completely unrelated to what's happening in the kernel. Please can you take what Thierry is working on for the kernel, and/or contribute to that binding etc., so we don't end up with multiple ways of doing the same thing. Part of the whole point of DT is to have a single way of representing HW that multiple OSs (or perhaps bootloaders) cna use. If everyone just goes and does their own thing, we've lost.