From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Laurent Pinchart Subject: Re: [ANN] Meeting minutes of the Cambourne meeting Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 00:26:04 +0200 Message-ID: <201108300026.05489.laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> References: <201107261647.19235.laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> <201108291508.59649.laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Guennadi Liakhovetski Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki , linux-media , Hans Verkuil , Sakari Ailus , Tuukka Toivonen , Sylwester Nawrocki , Tomasz Stanislawski , Marek Szyprowski , devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, Mauro Carvalho Chehab List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi Guennadi, On Tuesday 30 August 2011 00:20:09 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > On Mon, 29 Aug 2011, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > [snip] > > > My idea was to let the kernel register all devices based on the DT or > > board code. When the V4L2 host/bridge driver gets registered, it will > > then call a V4L2 core function with a list of subdevs it needs. The V4L2 > > core would store that information and react to bus notifier events to > > notify the V4L2 host/bridge driver when all subdevs are present. At that > > point the host/bridge driver will get hold of all the subdevs and call > > (probably through the V4L2 core) their .registered operation. That's > > where the subdevs will get access to their clock using clk_get(). > > Correct me, if I'm wrong, but this seems to be the case of sensor (and > other i2c-client) drivers having to succeed their probe() methods without > being able to actually access the hardware? That's right. I'd love to find a better way :-) Note that this is already the case for many subdev drivers that probe the hardware in the .registered() operation instead of the probe() method. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart