From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10D33C2BB1D for ; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 20:57:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF8ED2064A for ; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 20:57:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="gc7qDdHK"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b="Hwu3PZpm" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org CF8ED2064A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=HMbw3ot3esIunqdEuyr8CDWzoPqzCrDMCFumsuzAKWE=; b=gc7qDdHKjR6ejW bmngRHCCtcUUAu//LIXiLS+c05Yxsn/kDD9/zjYZ+5Q7XJDqOQpTcho6XDjrQTzLv/7UhLH6nySY8 LtDhiyybu43T74zej9OYdvid2RVG3ougyCpkQS9ZRlrk4POoz9j0YEmyd6wyoJTEguZhmSvsiCEmY nTQwHTpvOh1zpWwOxxgS+wk8pTC7hIxRaff1sHdyLOOVffMGU9s3EK4gQZASu4Tyqs2BTNt9QqSjJ HHx0NCGtLGa7uvSLM2oeMbL7+Q6RCqzn41DG0x/DyGoUDJtLwoAUkzG8LKeA5HQ5otNStDKvOSAot MQbNzNztu+w2QB0QxQfQ==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jOScM-0003La-Ei; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 20:57:14 +0000 Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com ([213.167.242.64]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jOScG-0003LG-U6 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 20:57:10 +0000 Received: from pendragon.ideasonboard.com (81-175-216-236.bb.dnainternet.fi [81.175.216.236]) by perceval.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 13C81521; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 22:57:07 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ideasonboard.com; s=mail; t=1586897827; bh=+opjKMJynJ2yyGq/b6mxDNSq3e8f5ZXoGqlv0GJOl4c=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Hwu3PZpm77wy9qhNgn34zcCfb8HT0nsEaRmSyepW5eBqDSjv/PUGzdc0Gw9UzJP7Q 1PlZPJcIoaT11Li8C2XvOTx875+2WLYsx57TjIbr1/JbQ2AHjXV91dvPFkDZJzugNy FufJ5UISqswefu7BV6wUkjGeAC/ZTDCfDlEsCg8w= Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 23:56:55 +0300 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Sakari Ailus Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] media: i2c: ov5645: Drop reading clock-frequency dt-property Message-ID: <20200414205655.GO19819@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> References: <1586191361-16598-1-git-send-email-prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com> <1586191361-16598-3-git-send-email-prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com> <20200406165108.GA7646@kekkonen.localdomain> <20200406173234.GD16885@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <20200407062241.GA8883@kekkonen.localdomain> <20200407122106.GD4751@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <20200407151401.GA5206@paasikivi.fi.intel.com> <20200414205552.GN19819@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200414205552.GN19819@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200414_135709_125373_6EC44A55 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 27.84 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Mark Rutland , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Geert Uytterhoeven , Fabio Estevam , Sascha Hauer , Kieran Bingham , Lad Prabhakar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lad Prabhakar , Rob Herring , NXP Linux Team , Pengutronix Kernel Team , Maxime Ripard , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Shawn Guo , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hi Sakari, On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 11:55:54PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 06:14:01PM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 03:21:06PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 09:22:41AM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote: > >>> On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 08:32:34PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >>>> On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 07:51:08PM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote: > >>>>> On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 05:42:38PM +0100, Lad Prabhakar wrote: > >>>>>> Modes in the driver are based on xvclk frequency fixed to 24MHz, but where > >>>>>> as the OV5645 sensor can support the xvclk frequency ranging from 6MHz to > >>>>>> 24MHz. So instead making clock-frequency as dt-property just let the > >>>>>> driver enforce the required clock frequency. > >>>>> > >>>>> Even if some current systems where the driver is used are using 24 MHz > >>>>> clock, that doesn't mean there wouldn't be systems using another frequency > >>>>> that the driver does not support right now. > >>>>> > >>>>> The driver really should not set the frequency unless it gets it from DT, > >>>>> but I think the preferred means is to use assigned-clock-rates instead, and > >>>>> not to involve the driver with setting the frequency. > >>>>> > >>>>> Otherwise we'll make it impossible to support other frequencies, at least > >>>>> without more or less random defaults. > >>>> > >>>> We're running in circles here. > >>>> > >>>> As the driver only supports 24MHz at the moment, the frequency should be > >>>> set by the driver, as it's a driver limitation. We can then work on > >>>> supporting additional frequencies, which will require DT to provide a > >>>> list of supported frequencies for the system, but that can be done on > >>>> top. > >>> > >>> I guess it would be possible to use different external clock frequencies on > >>> a sensor in a given system but that seems to be a bit far fetched, to the > >>> extent I've never seen anyone doing that in practice. > >>> > >>> Originally, the driver set the frequency based on the clock-frequency > >>> property. If we're removing that but use a fixed frequency instead, then > >>> how is that going to work going forward when someone adds support for other > >>> frequencies in the driver and has a system requiring that, while there are > >>> some other platforms relying on the driver setting a particular frequency? > >> > >> The standard property for this is link-frequencies, not clock-frequency. > >> Deprecating clock-frequency now paves the way to use the standard > >> property later when/if someone implements support for additional > >> frequencies. > > > > The external clock frequency and link frequency are different indeed, but > > they are related. The link frequency has been selected in a way that it is > > possible to generate that exact frequency using the chosen external clock > > frequency. If you change the external clock frequency, chances are good > > there is no PLL configuration to generate that link frequency. > > But aren't we supposed to pick the clock frequency based on the link > frequency specified in DT ? > > In any case, this policy needs to be carefully documented. And by this I mean in a central place, not leaving it to individual bindings. Maxime, we've previously discussed this issue privately on IRC, what's your opinion ? > >>> Although, if you're saying that this driver only needs to work with DT that > >>> comes with the kernel and you don't care about DT binary compatibility, > >>> this would be fine. > >> > >> I believe this series to not break backward compatibility, as the driver > >> only works with a 24MHz clock, so I expect all DTs to specify that. > > > > What you're still doing here is defining the DT bindings based on the > > current driver implementation, not the device properties. > > Quite the contrary, the device doesn't require any particular input > clock frequency, so we're removing that from DT :-) Specifying the clock > frequency in DT is in my opinion a manual workaround for not computing > it at runtime based on the desired link frequency, while the link > frequency is a property of the system as it specifies the range of link > frequencies that are safe to use from an EMC point of view. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel