From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 18:53:52 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: add V4L2 DT binding documentation Message-Id: <5050DA40.8050105@wwwdotorg.org> List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On 09/11/2012 09:51 AM, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > This patch adds a document, describing common V4L2 device tree bindings. > > Co-authored-by: Sylwester Nawrocki > Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski Overall, I think this looks pretty reasonable, so: Acked-by: Stephen Warren Just a couple comments: > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/v4l2.txt > + ceu0: ceu@0xfe910000 { > + mclk: master_clock { > + compatible = "renesas,ceu-clock"; > + #clock-cells = <1>; Why 1? If there's only 1 clock output from this provider, I don't see a need for any cells, unless there are some configuration flags? > + clock-frequency = <50000000>; /* max clock frequency */ > + clock-output-names = "mclk"; > + }; > + > + port { ... > + ceu0_0: link@0 { > + reg = <0>; > + remote = <&csi2_2>; > + immutable; Did we decide "immutable" was actually needed? Presumably the driver for the HW in question knows the HW isn't configurable, and would simply not attempt to apply any configuration even if the .dts author erroneously provided some? > + }; > + }; > + }; > + > + i2c0: i2c@0xfff20000 { ... > + ov772x_1: camera@0x21 { ... > + clocks = <&mclk 0>; So presumably that could just be "clocks = <&mclk>;"? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: swarren@wwwdotorg.org (Stephen Warren) Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 12:53:52 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] media: add V4L2 DT binding documentation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5050DA40.8050105@wwwdotorg.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 09/11/2012 09:51 AM, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > This patch adds a document, describing common V4L2 device tree bindings. > > Co-authored-by: Sylwester Nawrocki > Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski Overall, I think this looks pretty reasonable, so: Acked-by: Stephen Warren Just a couple comments: > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/v4l2.txt > + ceu0: ceu at 0xfe910000 { > + mclk: master_clock { > + compatible = "renesas,ceu-clock"; > + #clock-cells = <1>; Why 1? If there's only 1 clock output from this provider, I don't see a need for any cells, unless there are some configuration flags? > + clock-frequency = <50000000>; /* max clock frequency */ > + clock-output-names = "mclk"; > + }; > + > + port { ... > + ceu0_0: link at 0 { > + reg = <0>; > + remote = <&csi2_2>; > + immutable; Did we decide "immutable" was actually needed? Presumably the driver for the HW in question knows the HW isn't configurable, and would simply not attempt to apply any configuration even if the .dts author erroneously provided some? > + }; > + }; > + }; > + > + i2c0: i2c at 0xfff20000 { ... > + ov772x_1: camera at 0x21 { ... > + clocks = <&mclk 0>; So presumably that could just be "clocks = <&mclk>;"? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: add V4L2 DT binding documentation Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 12:53:52 -0600 Message-ID: <5050DA40.8050105@wwwdotorg.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-sh-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Guennadi Liakhovetski Cc: Linux Media Mailing List , Sylwester Nawrocki , Laurent Pinchart , Magnus Damm , devicetree-discuss , linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Mark Brown , Hans Verkuil , Marek Szyprowski , Arnd Bergmann , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 09/11/2012 09:51 AM, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > This patch adds a document, describing common V4L2 device tree bindings. > > Co-authored-by: Sylwester Nawrocki > Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski Overall, I think this looks pretty reasonable, so: Acked-by: Stephen Warren Just a couple comments: > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/v4l2.txt > + ceu0: ceu@0xfe910000 { > + mclk: master_clock { > + compatible = "renesas,ceu-clock"; > + #clock-cells = <1>; Why 1? If there's only 1 clock output from this provider, I don't see a need for any cells, unless there are some configuration flags? > + clock-frequency = <50000000>; /* max clock frequency */ > + clock-output-names = "mclk"; > + }; > + > + port { ... > + ceu0_0: link@0 { > + reg = <0>; > + remote = <&csi2_2>; > + immutable; Did we decide "immutable" was actually needed? Presumably the driver for the HW in question knows the HW isn't configurable, and would simply not attempt to apply any configuration even if the .dts author erroneously provided some? > + }; > + }; > + }; > + > + i2c0: i2c@0xfff20000 { ... > + ov772x_1: camera@0x21 { ... > + clocks = <&mclk 0>; So presumably that could just be "clocks = <&mclk>;"?