[PATCH 1/2] opos6uldev: make the LCD work again

[Sumit Garg]

On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 at 20:50, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 07:44:42PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
> > + Shawn, Krzysztof, Conor
> >
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> > On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 at 18:40, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 10:09:13AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 04:40:01PM +0100, Sébastien Szymanski wrote:
> > > > > Commit 5d7a95f49999 ("imx6ul/imx6ull: synchronise device trees with
> > > > > linux") removed the display timings from the board device tree whereas
> > > > > they are still needed by the mxsfb driver.
> > > > > Add the timings back (the correct ones) in the
> > > > > imx6ul-opos6uldev-u-boot.dtsi file and remove them from the
> > > > > opos6uldev.env file.
> > > > >
> > > > > Update the opos6uldev_defconfig file so that the LCD turns on at boot.
> > > > >
> > > > > Fixes: 5d7a95f49999 ("imx6ul/imx6ull: synchronise device trees with linux")
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Sébastien Szymanski <sebastien.szymanski at armadeus.com>
> > > >
> > > > Huh.  This is the commit that did that upstream.
> > > >
> > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=d9aa4d4fca67823838fe9861456201430c545e69
> > > >
> > > > It's interesting how the timings in linux were always slightly different
> > > > from in u-boot.
> > >
> > > Thanks for tracking that down, Dan. I'm adding in Sumit and Rob here
> > > because this is a recent (rather than ancient) example of one of the
> > > concerns about OF_UPSTREAM.
> >
> > I rather think about this as an opportunity to improve with
> > OF_UPSTREAM. We can feed these kinds of DT ABI breakages to
> > corresponding Linux kernel sub-arch maintainers. Especially once we
> > move to OF_UPSTREAM and a sub-arch maintainer profile in Linux kernel
> > to keep them aware that U-Boot should be considered too.
>
> Yes, a more extensive check around when removing information from dts
> files would be good.
>
> > > I think the commit in question can be
> > > summarized as "remove a bunch of explicit HW information because there's
> > > now a Linux Kernel driver that determines that dynamically". What do we
> > > do next? The old information is in a presumably valid binding still, can
> > > we just put it back and comment that consumers outside of Linux use this
> > > still so it's not removed again later? Or am I just missing where we can
> > > instead get this information from the DT still and not need to come up
> > > with a new driver and subsystems?
> >
> > I can see following two paths forward:
> >
> > 1) Partially revert the Linux kernel commit to add back the display
> > timings in DT.
> > 2) Extend drivers/video/simple_panel.c in U-Boot to add support for
> > compatible: "armadeus,st0700-adapt".
> >
> > If possible then I would be in favour of (2) rather than the current
> > patch to do this properly.
>
> Well, looking at the kernel drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-simple.c driver
> and then our drivers/video/simple_panel.c it sure would be nice if it's
> just a matter of adding a compatible but I wouldn't be surprised if it
> ends up needing more information being passed along too?

Although I am not a LCD panel expert but looking at the kernel driver
code [1], the display timings are rather taken from a static data
structure matching the compatible "armadeus,st0700-adapt".

[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-simple.c#n901

> And I'm going
> assume there's good reasons for the design change in how the drivers
> work in Linux now and note that it might make things more challenging
> for us when we do care about space.

I agree it is always going to be challenging to use DT during SPL
stage which is mostly constrained by limited on-chip RAM.

-Sumit

>
> --
> Tom