Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: display: panel: Add ChipWealth CH13726A AMOLED driver

[Aaron Kling]

On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 11:01 AM Aaron Kling <webgeek1234@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 4:08 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 12:08:32PM -0500, Aaron Kling wrote:
> > > The Chip Wealth Technology CH13726A AMOLED driver is a single chip
> > > solution for MIPI-DSI. This is used for the AYN Thor bottom panel.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Aaron Kling <webgeek1234@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >  .../display/panel/chipwealth,ch13726a.yaml         | 65 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 65 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/chipwealth,ch13726a.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/chipwealth,ch13726a.yaml
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5d964900795653401a871994bcf6403cdeaad64f
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/chipwealth,ch13726a.yaml
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
> > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > > +%YAML 1.2
> > > +---
> > > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/display/panel/chipwealth,ch13726a.yaml#
> > > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > > +
> > > +title: Chip Wealth Technology CH13726A AMOLED driver
> > > +
> > > +maintainers:
> > > +  - Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > +
> > > +description:
> > > +  Chip Wealth Technology CH13726A is a single-chip solution
> > > +  for AMOLED connected using a MIPI-DSI video interface.
> >
> > Here you describe the hardware, including what I asked last time -
> > explain why this is ayntec thor panel, but not chipwealth,ch13726a.
> >
> > Then also name the file as the compatible. If you do not know the part
> > (model?) number, then why do you think filename should be called
> > ch13726a?
>
> The vendor source release for the AYN Thor calls the 'panel' ch13726a,
> but per the data sheet for said part, it's a chip used in various
> panels, not a panel itself. The handling for various panels using this
> chip will share a lot of similarities since the chip is what the
> kernel driver will talk to. The alternative would be having separate
> drivers and bindings for every panel that will be mostly duplicated.
> This is the case for multiple things supported in the kernel already,
> such as the vtdr6130 which is currently described as a unique panel
> but is in fact the part number for a ddic. And I will need to refactor
> that for another device I have in the pipeline. In fact, all the
> device panels I need to submit in this context reference ddic's and
> not unique panel models. I'm waiting to see what gets approved for
> this series before sending the rest of those in.
>
> If I add something to the description like 'This chip is not a panel
> itself, but is used to control various panels', would that be
> sufficient? Or does the kernel need a new way to describe ddic's
> separately from panels, since this seems to be common now?

Krzysztof,

Any response to this? Or do I take another guess at what you want when
sending a new revision?

Aaron