DPAM VIF Generator generates a USBIF/DPAM VIF file based on user inputs for use with test equipment correlation, proper test coverage for certification, and at VESA Plugtest events.
I just tried the VIF tool and have a few comments.
Should we prefix all fields with dpam? For example, dpam_port_capability?
I don’t think we need the receptacle_indication field, it can be derived from the USBIF “Captive_Cable” field. If the Captive_Cable is yes, it’s DP on USB-C Plug, otherwise, it’s DP on USB-C receptacle.
For dp_transport_signaling, we should use the same value as that in the spec, i.e. Supports DP signaling rates and electrical specification should be 1, not 0
For the pin assignments fields, the same, the value should follow the spec, source_pin_assignments C & D supported, the value should be 1100b (0xC, or 12)
sopp_dp_transport_signaling, the same, value should follow the spec
I suggest we prefix all fields under sopp_displayportcapabilities with sopp, dp_source_device_pin_assignments is confusing. In USB tradition, fields with no suffix is for cable, and for port, the same name with a _SOP suffix. For example, USB_VID and USB_VID_SOP.
uhbr135_support_label should probably name uhbr135_supported, and 1 should mean supported
I just tried the VIF tool and have a few comments.