On 01/15/2018 11:32 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
The LVDS encoders used to be described in DT as part of the DU. They now
have their own DT node, linked to the DU using the OF graph bindings.
This allows moving internal LVDS encoder support to a separate driver
modelled as a DRM bridge. Backward
Hi Sergei,
On Monday, 15 January 2018 22:25:16 EET Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> On 01/13/2018 02:14 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > The LVDS encoders used to be described in DT as part of the DU. They now
> > have their own DT node, linked to the DU using the OF graph bindings.
> > This allows moving
Hello!
On 01/13/2018 02:14 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
The LVDS encoders used to be described in DT as part of the DU. They now
have their own DT node, linked to the DU using the OF graph bindings.
This allows moving internal LVDS encoder support to a separate driver
modelled as a DRM bridge. B
Hi Geert,
On Monday, 15 January 2018 10:30:23 EET Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 12:14 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > The LVDS encoders used to be described in DT as part of the DU. They now
> > have their own DT node, linked to the DU using the OF graph bindings.
> > This al
Hi Laurent,
On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 12:14 AM, Laurent Pinchart
wrote:
> The LVDS encoders used to be described in DT as part of the DU. They now
> have their own DT node, linked to the DU using the OF graph bindings.
> This allows moving internal LVDS encoder support to a separate driver
> modell
The LVDS encoders used to be described in DT as part of the DU. They now
have their own DT node, linked to the DU using the OF graph bindings.
This allows moving internal LVDS encoder support to a separate driver
modelled as a DRM bridge. Backward compatibility is retained as legacy
DT is patched l
