From: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>
To: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com>,
Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir.zapolskiy@linaro.org>,
Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-phy@lists.infradead.org,
linux-media@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] phy: qcom-mipi-csi2: Add a CSI2 MIPI D-PHY driver
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2025 10:32:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <33d76d7f-ab14-4e76-8ffb-eb370901a046@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <57501e81-7e9c-4cb1-9a37-18307d1e06ca@linaro.org>
On 21/07/2025 18:16, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> On 21/07/2025 16:46, neil.armstrong@linaro.org wrote:
>> On 15/07/2025 11:33, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>> On 7/15/25 11:20 AM, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>>>> On 7/15/25 12:01, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>>>> On 7/15/25 8:35 AM, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/15/25 03:13, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
>>>>>>> On 14/07/2025 16:30, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think that is genuinely something we should handle in camss-csid.c
>>>>>>>>> maybe with some meta-data inside of the ports/endpoints..
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is a CSIPHY property, a CSIPHY hardware configuration and a wiring
>>>>>>>> of sensors to a CSIPHY. Where is the relation to CSID here? There is no.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All the PHY really needs to know is the # of lanes in aggregate, which
>>>>>>> physical lanes to map to which logical lanes and the pixel clock.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We should add additional support to the Kernel's D-PHY API parameters
>>>>>>> mechanism to support that physical-to-logical mapping but, that's not
>>>>>>> required for this series or for any currently know upstream user of CAMSS.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please share at least a device tree node description, which supports
>>>>>>>> a connection of two sensors to a single CSIPHY, like it shall be done
>>>>>>>> expectedly.
>>>>>>> &camss {
>>>>>>> port@0 {
>>>>>>> csiphy0_lanes01_ep: endpoint0 {
>>>>>>> data-lanes = <0 1>;
>>>>>>> remote-endpoint = <&sensor0_ep>;
>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> csiphy0_lanes23_ep: endpoint0 {
>>>>>>> data-lanes = <2 3>;
>>>>>>> remote-endpoint = <&sensor1_ep>;
>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Don't you understand that this is broken?.. That's no good.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please listen and reread the messages given to you above, your proposed
>>>>>> "solution" does not support by design a valid hardware setup of two
>>>>>> sensors connected to the same CSIPHY.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would propose to stop force pushing an uncorrectable dt scheme, it
>>>>>> makes no sense.
>>>>>
>>>>> If all you're asking for is an ability to grab an of_graph reference
>>>>> from the camss (v4l2) driver, you can simply do something along the
>>>>> lines of of_graph_get_remote_port(phy->dev->of_node)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's not about the driver specifics, my comment is about a proper
>>>> hardware description in dts notation, please see the device tree node
>>>> names.
>>>
>>> I'm a little lost on what you're trying to argue for..
>>>
>>> I could make out:
>>>
>>> 1. "the phy should be a multimedia device"
>>> 2. "There is no ports at all, which makes the device tree node unusable,
>>> since you can not provide a way to connect any sensors to the phy."
>>>
>>> I don't really understand #1.. maybe that could be the case if the PHY
>>> has a multitude of tunables (which I don't know if it does, but wouldn't
>>> be exactly surprised if it did) that may be usecase/pipeline-specific
>>>
>>> As for #2, I do think it makes sense to connect the sensors to the PHY,
>>> as that's a representation of electrical signals travelling from the
>>> producer to the consumer (plus the data passed in e.g. data-lanes is
>>> directly related to the PHY and necessarily consumed by its driver)
>>
>> The port/endpoint should represent the data flow, and if the signal is the following:
>>
>> sensor -> csiphy -> csid
>
> I'll be honest.
>
> I looked at your upstreamed code
>
> drivers/phy/amlogic/phy-meson-axg-mipi-dphy.c Documentation/devicetree/bindings/parch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-khadas-vim3-ts050.dtsoc/meson-axg.dtsi
>
> And didn't really think CSIPHY needed to be included in the data-graph.
This is DSI, but I understand your point.
The whole key point here is the combo mode, as I understood the combo mode feature
makes the PHY lanes available as 2 separate streams, like if you got 2 "controllers"
attached to the same PHY. So in fact, the PHY should have a single node, but 2 PHY
interfaces in combo mode.
This makes all this controller/phy model very complex to handle and add a lot of
logic in the camss side. Moving the "csiphy" as an independent media device that
can declare up to 2 endpoints in combo mode makes things much simpler, and allows
us to attach each "csiphy" stream to any "controller" side of camss.
Neil
>
> ---
> bod
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-22 8:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-10 16:16 [PATCH 0/2] phy: qcom-mipi-csi2: Add a CSI2 MIPI DPHY driver Bryan O'Donoghue
2025-07-10 16:16 ` [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: phy: qcom: Add MIPI CSI2 C-PHY/DPHY Combo schema Bryan O'Donoghue
2025-07-10 23:08 ` Rob Herring
2025-07-14 14:13 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2025-07-14 14:42 ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2025-07-15 6:40 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2025-07-15 8:52 ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2025-07-10 16:16 ` [PATCH 2/2] phy: qcom-mipi-csi2: Add a CSI2 MIPI D-PHY driver Bryan O'Donoghue
2025-07-10 17:08 ` Konrad Dybcio
2025-07-11 9:14 ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2025-07-11 11:29 ` Konrad Dybcio
2025-07-14 14:16 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2025-07-14 14:43 ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2025-07-14 14:58 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2025-07-14 15:17 ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2025-07-14 15:26 ` Konrad Dybcio
2025-07-14 15:30 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2025-07-15 0:13 ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2025-07-15 6:35 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2025-07-15 9:01 ` Konrad Dybcio
2025-07-15 9:20 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2025-07-15 9:33 ` Konrad Dybcio
2025-07-21 15:46 ` neil.armstrong
2025-07-21 16:16 ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2025-07-21 16:22 ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2025-07-21 16:29 ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2025-07-22 8:32 ` Neil Armstrong [this message]
2025-07-22 9:08 ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2025-07-22 9:59 ` Neil Armstrong
2025-07-22 10:37 ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2025-08-12 13:39 ` neil.armstrong
2025-08-12 15:05 ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2025-08-12 16:08 ` Neil Armstrong
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=33d76d7f-ab14-4e76-8ffb-eb370901a046@linaro.org \
--to=neil.armstrong@linaro.org \
--cc=bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kishon@kernel.org \
--cc=konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-phy@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
--cc=vladimir.zapolskiy@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).