From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from relay1.mentorg.com ([192.94.38.131]:33971 "EHLO relay1.mentorg.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752957AbcGIVgL (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Jul 2016 17:36:11 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/11] media: adv7180: add bt.656-4 OF property To: Lars-Peter Clausen References: <1467846004-12731-1-git-send-email-steve_longerbeam@mentor.com> <1467846004-12731-7-git-send-email-steve_longerbeam@mentor.com> <577E6C98.3020608@metafoo.de> <5781497A.2080804@gmail.com> <5781685C.7040907@mentor.com> CC: From: Steve Longerbeam Message-ID: <57816E47.90102@mentor.com> Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:36:07 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5781685C.7040907@mentor.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 07/09/2016 02:10 PM, Steve Longerbeam wrote: > > > On 07/09/2016 11:59 AM, Steve Longerbeam wrote: >> >> >> On 07/07/2016 07:52 AM, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: >>> On 07/07/2016 12:59 AM, Steve Longerbeam wrote: >>>> Add a device tree boolean property "bt656-4" to allow setting >>>> the ITU-R BT.656-4 compatible bit. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Steve Longerbeam >>> >>> + /* select ITU-R BT.656-4 compatible? */ >>> + if (of_property_read_bool(client->dev.of_node, "bt656-4")) >>> + state->bt656_4 = true; >>> This property needs to be documented. In my opinion it should also be a >>> property of the endpoint sub-node rather than the toplevel device >>> node since >>> this is a configuration of the endpoint format. >> >> Agreed, it's really a config of the backend capture endpoint. I'll >> move it >> there and also document it in >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/i2c/adv7180.txt. > > er, scratch that. ITU-R BT.656 compatibility is really a property of > the bt.656 bus. It > should be added to v4l2 endpoints and parsed by > v4l2_of_parse_endpoint(). I've created > a patch to add a "bt656-mode" property to v4l2 endpoints and will copy > all the maintainers. But I'm going back and forth on whether this property should be added to the adv7180's local endpoint, or to the remote endpoint. I'm leaning towards the remote endpoint, since this is more about how the backend wants the bus configured. Steve