On 8/12/26 10:46, David Heidelberg wrote:
On 12/08/2026 07:21, Esteban Urrutia wrote:
On 8/11/26 9:05 AM, David Heidelberg wrote:
Hi Esteban,
Usually the used pattern is vendor,ddic+panel-model
novatek,nt37703-motorola-bronco
...but motorola bronco isn't the model of the panel.
My recommendation - look at some video of screen replacement, stop at moment
when FLEX cable from panel is visible and that's where the panel model usually
is.
I somewhat doubt the panel model would be located in the FPC cable.
I did search anyway but didn't find anything of interest. And I'm not
willing to risk damaging the display flex or the battery of my
development device just for a possibility either.
No-one asks you to disassemble the device :)
Sadly, I haven't found any video doing display replacement either.
In worst case such as this I assume it make sense keep the phone model in the
compatible until panel codename is found.
For the compatible pattern I used the implemented pattern for the
NT36523 TDDI, which is also used for other ICs such as the RM69380.
So, I believe it should be okay to leave the compatible as is.
I would like to hear a word from Neil first. In similar cases like this would
make sense to have one way defining these compatible strings used in phones.
bit I missed in the review the part:
+ compatible = "motorola,bronco-tianma-v2-nt37703",
"novatek,nt37703";
Unless the driver is able to auto-detect the connected panel (unlikely),
novatek,nt37703 doesn't make sense. The DDIC without the panel is useless.
For example, in sdm845-oneplus-fajita and enchilada, we have the generic
compatible because it was introduced before, so it's kept for compatibility
reasons. There is no need to do that here.
Yeah today the norm is to add the ddic as second compatible entry so the first
compatible just describes the pane, so here it should be:
compatible = "motorola,bronco-tianma-v2", "novatek,nt37703";
Neil
Thanks
David
David Heidelberg
Regards,
Esteban
