Re: [PATCH][RESEND] drm: panel-simple: add URT UMSH-8596MD-xT panel support

[Thierry Reding]

On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 05:25:33PM +0200, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
> Hi Thierry,
> 
> On 05.10.2015 13:01, Thierry Reding wrote:
> >> On 01.09.2015 15:50, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
> >>> This patch adds support for United Radiant Technology
> >>> UMSH-8596MD-xT 7.0" WVGA TFT LCD panels
> >>> (both LVDS and parallel versions) to DRM
> >>> panel-simple driver.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Maciej Szmigiero <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> ---
> >>> This is a resend without changes.
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/panel/urt,umsh-8596md.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/panel/urt,umsh-8596md.txt
> >>> new file mode 100644
> >>> index 0000000..2990e6b
> >>> --- /dev/null
> >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/panel/urt,umsh-8596md.txt
> >>> @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
> >>> +United Radiant Technology UMSH-8596MD-xT 7.0" WVGA TFT LCD panel
> >>> +
> >>> +Supported are LVDS versions (-11T, -19T) and parallel ones
> >>> +(-T, -1T, -7T, -20T).
> > 
> > Please don't use this kind of wildcard compatible values. If these are
> > different models then each of them deserves a separate compatible
> > string.
> 
> The differences between these revisions are like different maximum backlight
> luminance or presence / absence of touch panel.
> 
> None of this changes panel timings - should they be split into different
> compatible values anyway?

Yes, absolutely. The compatible doesn't only define what the video
timings are, it defines the specific piece of hardware. While it is true
that the panel-simple driver currently doesn't use any other information
the DT compatible value characterizes the full hardware and therefore
should take into account all of the device's properties.

Presence of a touch panel sounds like a very important property and the
maximum backlight brightness might also become important at some ponit.

> >>> You might want to
> >>> split the DT binding and vendor prefix to separate patches.
> >>
> >> Do you mean to first submit new vendor prefix then panel patch with docs?
> >> Or even docs separately?
> > 
> > This should be three patches: the vendor prefix is usually a separate
> > patch and needs an Acked-by from one of the device tree bindings
> > maintainers. The binding itself should also be a separate patch and the
> > driver changes should come last.
> 
> I will split the patch and first submit DT binding docs.

Thanks,
Thierry

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature