Message ID | 1565867073-24746-1-git-send-email-fabrizio.castro@bp.renesas.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | Add dual-LVDS panel support to EK874 | expand |
Hi Fabrizio > it appears that Rob has been busy converting the dt-bindings relevant to this > series, and his changes are now found in linux-next. Most notably > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/panel-lvds.txt has now become > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/lvds.yaml > > You have already taken patch: > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11072749/ > > as such the patch I am sending you is still related to: > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/panel-lvds.txt > > Patch "dt-bindings: display: Add bindings for Advantech IDK-2121WR" is still > assuming the format is .txt, as I am not too sure about what the protocol is in > this case? Shall we take this patch and convert it later to .yaml or shall I > convert it to .yaml straight away? > > Please, let me know what's the best course of action. It is preferred that all new display and panel bindings uses the new meta-schema format. And that the writers uses the available tools to verify the bindings submission. This is one way to avoid simple mistakes in examples. Sam
Hi Sam, Thank you for your feedback! > From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> > Sent: 15 August 2019 15:16 > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] Add dual-LVDS panel support to EK874 > > Hi Fabrizio > > > it appears that Rob has been busy converting the dt-bindings relevant to this > > series, and his changes are now found in linux-next. Most notably > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/panel-lvds.txt has now become > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/lvds.yaml > > > > You have already taken patch: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11072749/ > > > > as such the patch I am sending you is still related to: > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/panel-lvds.txt > > > > Patch "dt-bindings: display: Add bindings for Advantech IDK-2121WR" is still > > assuming the format is .txt, as I am not too sure about what the protocol is in > > this case? Shall we take this patch and convert it later to .yaml or shall I > > convert it to .yaml straight away? > > > > Please, let me know what's the best course of action. > > It is preferred that all new display and panel bindings uses the new > meta-schema format. > And that the writers uses the available tools to verify the bindings > submission. > This is one way to avoid simple mistakes in examples. Will give the meta-schema format a shot. Thanks, Fab > > Sam