Re: [PATCH v6 2/5] dt-bindings: media: Add qcom,x1e80100-camss

[Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>]

On 24/04/2025 11:07, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 24/04/2025 11:34, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
>> On 24/04/2025 07:40, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> +  vdd-csiphy-0p8-supply:
>>> Same comment as other series on the lists - this is wrong name. There
>>> are no pins named like this and all existing bindings use different name.
>>
>> The existing bindings are unfortunately not granular enough.
>>
>> I'll post s series to capture pin-names per the SoC pinout shortly.
> How are the pins/supplies actually called?
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

I don't think strictly algning to pin-names is what we want.

Here are the input pins

VDD_A_CSI_0_1_1P2
VDD_A_CSI_2_4_1P2
VDD_A_CSI_0_1_0P9
VDD_A_CSI_2_4_0P9

I think the right way to represent this

yaml:
csiphy0-1p2-supply
csiphy1-1p2-supply
csiphy2-1p2-supply
csiphy3-1p2-supply

dts:

vdd-csiphy0-0p9-supply = <&vreg_l2c_0p8>;
vdd-csiphy1-0p9-supply = <&vreg_l2c_0p8>;

etc

vdda-csiphy0-1p2-supply = <&vreg_l1c_1p2>;

because that captures the fact we could have separate lines for each 
phy, names it generically and then leaves it up to the dts 
implementation to represent what actually happened on the PCB.

That would also work for qcm2290 and sm8650.

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20250423221954.1926453-2-vladimir.zapolskiy@linaro.org/

So for sm8650 instead of

+  vdda-csi01-0p9-supply:
+
+  vdda-csi24-0p9-supply:
+
+  vdda-csi35-0p9-supply:
+
+  vdda-csi01-1p2-supply:
+
+  vdda-csi24-1p2-supply:
+
+  vdda-csi35-1p2-supply:

you would have

+  vdda-csiphy0-0p9-supply:
+
+  vdda-csiphy1-0p9-supply:

+  vdda-csiphy0-1p2-supply:
+
+  vdda-csiphy1-1p2-supply:

Which would then be consistent across SoCs for as long as 0p9 and 1p2 
are the power-domains used by these PHYs.

---
bod