Re: [PATCH v1 5/9 RESEND] ARM: tegra: transformer: Add support for front camera

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] Hardware Topology Violation: Front camera mistakenly bound directly to CSI-B on TF300T variants.
- [Low] Device Tree Binding Violation: Unallowed `orientation` property in `aptina,mi1040` node.
--

commit f0de1eeb70b375136f716e42d1c0078025071767
Author: Svyatoslav Ryhel <clamor95@gmail.com>

ARM: tegra: transformer: Add support for front camera
    
This commit adds the front camera video path using the Aptina MI1040 sensor.
It notes that the configuration works for TF201 and TF700T, while the TF300T
series routes the front camera through an additional ISP.

> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra30-asus-transformer-common.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra30-asus-transformer-common.dtsi
> index ead95306840f7..e6d079647f772 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra30-asus-transformer-common.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra30-asus-transformer-common.dtsi

[ ... ]

> @@ -1160,6 +1246,36 @@ light-sensor@1c {
>  			vdd-supply = <&vdd_3v3_sys>;
>  		};
>  
> +		/* Aptina 1/6" HD SOC (MI1040) */
> +		front-camera@48 {
> +			compatible = "aptina,mi1040";
> +			reg = <0x48>;

Since this node is added to the common device tree include file, won't it
be applied to the TF300T variants as well? 

The commit message mentions that the front camera on TF300T/TG/TL is linked
through an additional ISP, so wouldn't putting this directly in the shared
dtsi without disabling it cause probe failures or I2C timeouts on those
models?

> +
> +			clocks = <&tegra_car TEGRA30_CLK_CSUS>;
> +
> +			reset-gpios = <&gpio TEGRA_GPIO(O, 0) GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
> +
> +			vddio-supply = <&vdd_1v8_cam>;
> +			vdd-supply = <&vdd_1v8_cam>;
> +			vaa-supply = <&avdd_2v85_fcam>;
> +
> +			orientation = <0>; /* Front camera */

This isn't a bug, but does the aptina,mi1040 binding allow the orientation
property? The schema (onnn,mt9m114.yaml) doesn't appear to define it or
reference a generic schema that permits it, which might cause a dtbs_check
validation error.

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260511074859.24930-1-clamor95@gmail.com?part=5