Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230531093206.3893469-1-victor.liu@nxp.com> <20230531093206.3893469-2-victor.liu@nxp.com>
 <bd257ed0-71a7-0504-0bfe-14775ac93571@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <bd257ed0-71a7-0504-0bfe-14775ac93571@linaro.org>
From:   Ying Liu <gnuiyl@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 2 Jun 2023 11:54:33 +0800
Message-ID: <CAOcKUNWkubMK1MJS73tpbm4bafQv2GAMuq_JOTFbvB9EVDRvxg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: display: bridge: Add NXP i.MX93
 parallel display format configuration
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
Cc:     Liu Ying <victor.liu@nxp.com>, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, neil.armstrong@linaro.org,
        conor+dt@kernel.org, rfoss@kernel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, jonas@kwiboo.se,
        shawnguo@kernel.org, s.hauer@pengutronix.de,
        jernej.skrabec@gmail.com, robh+dt@kernel.org,
        Laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com, andrzej.hajda@intel.com,
        kernel@pengutronix.de, linux-imx@nxp.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 1:45=E2=80=AFAM Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 31/05/2023 11:32, Liu Ying wrote:
> > NXP i.MX93 mediamix blk-ctrl contains one DISPLAY_MUX register which
> > configures parallel display format by using the "PARALLEL_DISP_FORMAT"
> > field. Add device tree bindings for the display format configuration.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Liu Ying <victor.liu@nxp.com>
> > ---
> > v1->v2:
> > * No change.
>
> How did you implement Rob's comment?

Should have discussed more in v1 about Rob's comment, but
let me explain why this dt-binding makes sense here:

Both i.MX8mp SoC and i.MX93 SoC media block control devices
contain a LVDS Display Bridge(LDB) child device. The i.MX93 block
control device additionally contains this PDFC child device.

LDB dt-binding [1] is written in a separate file and referenced in
i.MX8mp block control dt-binding [2].  So, for the sake of consistency,
it makes sense to keep this PDFC dt-binding and reference it
together with the LDB one [1] in i.MX93 block control dt-binding [3]
in future, doesn't it?

It seems good to have a separate PDFC dt-binding in case it can/will
be referenced by multiple parent device dt-bindings.

[1] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/fsl,ldb.yaml
[2] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/imx/fsl,imx8mp-media-blk-ctrl.yam=
l
[3] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/imx/fsl,imx93-media-blk-ctrl.yaml

Regards,
Liu Ying

>
> >
> >  .../display/bridge/nxp,imx93-pdfc.yaml        | 78 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 78 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/nx=
p,imx93-pdfc.yaml