Re: [PATCH 02/10] dt-bindings: display: imx: Add i.MX8qxp Display Controller display engine

Maxime Ripard
2024-07-18T15:53:04Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2228 bytes --]

On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 08:50:35AM GMT, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 08/07/2024 16:52, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 04:04:21PM GMT, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 08/07/2024 08:40, Liu Ying wrote:
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + "^framegen@[0-9a-f]+$":
> >>>>> + type: object
> >>>>> + additionalProperties: true
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + properties:
> >>>>> + compatible:
> >>>>> + const: fsl,imx8qxp-dc-framegen
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + "^gammacor@[0-9a-f]+$":
> >>>>
> >>>> This looks like you are organizing bindings per your driver architecture.
> >>>
> >>> As I mentioned in cover letter, this series addresses Maxime's
> >>> comment for the previous series - split the display controller
> >>> into multiple internal devices. Maxime insisted on doing this.
> >>
> >> But these are not separate devices. Look:
> >> 1. parent DC:
> >> reg = <0x56180000 0x40000>;
> >>
> >> 2. child interrupt controller:
> >> reg = <0x56180040 0x60>;
> >>
> >> That address is within parent.
> >>
> >> 3. Then we go to things like:
> >> reg = <0x5618b400 0x14>, <0x5618b800 0x1c00>;
> >>
> >> Still within parent's range and just few words in address range. That's
> >> a clear indication that you choose few registers and call it a "device".
> >
> > That's never really been a metric though?
> >
> > If not, one could just create a "soc" device node covering the entire
> > register map, and since it would overlap despite clearly defined
> > features, you would claim it's a single device?
>
> Since I do not create such one-address-soc devices, I claim I have
> separate devices in the SoC. Here is not the case: there is a device
> covering entire address space.
>
> Soc is a good example, because components/blocks of the SoC are being
> re-used among different SoCs. Is the case here?
>
> BTW, it could be that some of the sub-devices here are worth to be
> devices, I agree.

This was the binding of the previous version:
https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/20230822085949.816844-2-victor.liu@nxp.com/

To me, the duplication of interrupts, clocks and power domains with
different indices kind of proves that it's all separate devices

Maxime

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]