From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomi Valkeinen Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 07:23:05 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] Doc/DT: Add DT binding documentation for HDMI Connector Message-Id: <53142DD9.4020709@ti.com> MIME-Version: 1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="tX7KBMdIlXs3671UlqlmJWi4Fg0xrbfsd" List-Id: References: <1393590016-9361-1-git-send-email-tomi.valkeinen@ti.com> <1393590016-9361-5-git-send-email-tomi.valkeinen@ti.com> <20140228160612.GR21483@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <5310B609.1010105@ti.com> <20140228163431.GV21483@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: To: Geert Uytterhoeven , Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Linux Fbdev development list , Sascha Hauer , Tomasz Figa , DRI Development , Inki Dae , Andrzej Hajda , Rob Clark , Thierry Reding , Laurent Pinchart , Philipp Zabel , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Sebastian Hesselbarth --tX7KBMdIlXs3671UlqlmJWi4Fg0xrbfsd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 01/03/14 20:58, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 5:34 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux > wrote: >> There's actually three HDMI connectors: >> >> All three connectors carry all required HDMI signals, including a TM= DS >> link. The Type B connector is slightly larger and carries a second T= MDS >> link, which is necessary to support very high resolution displays us= ing >> dual link. The Type C connector carries the same signals as the Type= A >> but is more compact and intended for mobile applications. >> >> So, Type C and Type A are electrically the same. >=20 > There's also D (e.g. on BeagleBone Black) and E: >=20 > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI#Connectors >=20 > Electrically they seem to be the same as A/C. Right. And then there are the HDMI versions, and things like HDMI Ethernet Channel. After looking at these a bit, I don't think the HDMI connector needs any of those (hdmi version, eth) defined. So... compatible =3D "hdmi-connector"; type =3D "a"; Or compatible =3D "hdmi-connector"; type-a; I don't right away see any big pro with either one compared to the other.= Tomi --tX7KBMdIlXs3671UlqlmJWi4Fg0xrbfsd Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJTFC3ZAAoJEPo9qoy8lh71Gi8QAJNA6Hu8ubL7yiO5jzr6kxSc Yx/d8O/HngrIW4IGCfECdwBIMk3HOW7DGuSu9CkZk5N3LB4DT8INOTc31U5aDzvK bT7LGhJTWTJODRvvGwIURoe5tnhOW+z+RFxA9AtueNiC3SXQj8JdPBeLL7BTVvnQ nOsJU2qTQ3qaGjYWqZxdCn+kpaglV57eC/NMhsmewdl0R4nfdHEPYlCrGtA2+XwW C4lJQOrCkcJDjxcD3HGcaMcTrq9+IflnLYrE1KL7jgQcQlYE1NFfhC+UxD4d/LKB cnBnlwAHmB03u16wW8z4fzYqpjVDrlop/gXr7cpueh1+FcyUsOBW0x0sGF06mjvI 43TjkP2AQHy+Pognl2Km4djq+FdQgTAy/y5UyqlqhKoT9gZl4eH+PlXVa4JmAua6 HfEYB8/+mVNm/tlE/E3aLRMKVjG+U8OHloCf7tDtdmu+tNdFTlCKrRTkzG5dghEJ goCDfcgr8GZ69x1Ymv7KCNaxcVOWGe2sEfvCYMti1OlEFTdkNTlPPiKXxTVEg4Zc h7NR6ZHVGF95IOjBxEjyYNuxFIBT8RZ6NUBsWwybmQGOdnOvL7zquOGaNrqkApSc Rq22DXn49fWEsJKbrSYdPZgtg0TXfm8DERzGcGZmOLmXgVEEu1jl9k2567fosKEn FDaIId0er/ojIFE4z1h8 =+D5X -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --tX7KBMdIlXs3671UlqlmJWi4Fg0xrbfsd--