Update the 'vsps' property structure in the documentation example to
reflect what's actually implemented in the device tree sources.
Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi <[email protected]>
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/renesas,du.txt | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/renesas,du.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/renesas,du.txt
index 100114ef11d5..262047053d31 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/renesas,du.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/renesas,du.txt
@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ Example: R8A7795 (R-Car H3) ES2.0 DU
<&cpg CPG_MOD 722>,
<&cpg CPG_MOD 721>;
clock-names = "du.0", "du.1", "du.2", "du.3";
- vsps = <&vspd0 0>, <&vspd1 0>, <&vspd2 0>, <&vspd0 1>;
+ vsps = <&vspd0 0 &vspd1 0 &vspd2 &vspd0 1>;
cmms = <&cmm0 &cmm1 &cmm2 &cmm3>;
ports {
--
2.21.0
Hi Jacopo,
Thank you for the patch.
On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 04:22:03PM +0200, Jacopo Mondi wrote:
> Update the 'vsps' property structure in the documentation example to
> reflect what's actually implemented in the device tree sources.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi <[email protected]>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/renesas,du.txt | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/renesas,du.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/renesas,du.txt
> index 100114ef11d5..262047053d31 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/renesas,du.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/renesas,du.txt
> @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ Example: R8A7795 (R-Car H3) ES2.0 DU
> <&cpg CPG_MOD 722>,
> <&cpg CPG_MOD 721>;
> clock-names = "du.0", "du.1", "du.2", "du.3";
> - vsps = <&vspd0 0>, <&vspd1 0>, <&vspd2 0>, <&vspd0 1>;
> + vsps = <&vspd0 0 &vspd1 0 &vspd2 &vspd0 1>;
The former is simpler to read than the latter in my opinion. Shouldn't
we update the .dtsi files instead ?
> cmms = <&cmm0 &cmm1 &cmm2 &cmm3>;
>
> ports {
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
Hi Laurent, Jacopo,
On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 8:50 PM Laurent Pinchart
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 04:22:03PM +0200, Jacopo Mondi wrote:
> > Update the 'vsps' property structure in the documentation example to
> > reflect what's actually implemented in the device tree sources.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi <[email protected]>
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/renesas,du.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/renesas,du.txt
> > @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ Example: R8A7795 (R-Car H3) ES2.0 DU
> > <&cpg CPG_MOD 722>,
> > <&cpg CPG_MOD 721>;
> > clock-names = "du.0", "du.1", "du.2", "du.3";
> > - vsps = <&vspd0 0>, <&vspd1 0>, <&vspd2 0>, <&vspd0 1>;
> > + vsps = <&vspd0 0 &vspd1 0 &vspd2 &vspd0 1>;
>
> The former is simpler to read than the latter in my opinion. Shouldn't
> we update the .dtsi files instead ?
Yes, it is easier to read (for humans).
> > cmms = <&cmm0 &cmm1 &cmm2 &cmm3>;
Perhaps we want grouping here, too?
> >
> > ports {
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Hi Geert,
On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 10:00:23PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 8:50 PM Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 04:22:03PM +0200, Jacopo Mondi wrote:
> >> Update the 'vsps' property structure in the documentation example to
> >> reflect what's actually implemented in the device tree sources.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi <[email protected]>
>
> >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/renesas,du.txt
> >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/renesas,du.txt
> >> @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ Example: R8A7795 (R-Car H3) ES2.0 DU
> >> <&cpg CPG_MOD 722>,
> >> <&cpg CPG_MOD 721>;
> >> clock-names = "du.0", "du.1", "du.2", "du.3";
> >> - vsps = <&vspd0 0>, <&vspd1 0>, <&vspd2 0>, <&vspd0 1>;
> >> + vsps = <&vspd0 0 &vspd1 0 &vspd2 &vspd0 1>;
> >
> > The former is simpler to read than the latter in my opinion. Shouldn't
> > we update the .dtsi files instead ?
>
> Yes, it is easier to read (for humans).
>
> >> cmms = <&cmm0 &cmm1 &cmm2 &cmm3>;
>
> Perhaps we want grouping here, too?
As there's a single entry per CMM it matters less in my opinion. I'm
fine with either options.
>
> >>
> >> ports {
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart