Re: [PATCH RFC v6 1/6] dt-bindings: display: add Unisoc's drm master bindings

[Rob Herring]

On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 4:08 AM Kevin Tang <kevin3.tang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> From: Kevin Tang <kevin.tang@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> The Unisoc DRM master device is a virtual device needed to list all
> DPU devices or other display interface nodes that comprise the
> graphics subsystem
>
> Cc: Orson Zhai <orsonzhai@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Chunyan Zhang <zhang.lyra@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Tang <kevin.tang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/display/sprd/drm.yaml      | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 36 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/sprd/drm.yaml

If you want bindings reviewed, then you need to Cc
devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Otherwise you may be waiting until the 6th
version or later or never.

>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/sprd/drm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/sprd/drm.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..b5792c0
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/sprd/drm.yaml
> @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0

New bindings should be dual licensed:

(GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)

> +%YAML 1.2
> +---
> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/display/sprd/drm.yaml#
> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> +
> +title: Unisoc DRM master device

DRM is a Linux thing and shouldn't be part of a binding.

> +
> +maintainers:
> +  - Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>

No, this should be you or someone that knows the h/w.

> +
> +description: |
> +  The Unisoc DRM master device is a virtual device needed to list all
> +  DPU devices or other display interface nodes that comprise the
> +  graphics subsystem.
> +
> +properties:
> +  compatible:
> +    const: sprd,display-subsystem
> +
> +  ports:
> +    description:
> +      Should contain a list of phandles pointing to display interface port
> +      of DPU devices.
> +
> +required:
> +  - compatible
> +  - ports
> +
> +examples:
> +  - |
> +    display-subsystem {
> +        compatible = "sprd,display-subsystem";
> +        ports = <&dpu_out>;

We generally try to avoid this virtual node as it doesn't represent
any h/w. Can't you bind the driver to the DPU directly?

Rob