From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 18:53:52 +0000
Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: add V4L2 DT binding documentation
Message-Id: <5050DA40.8050105@wwwdotorg.org>
List-Id: <linux-sh.vger.kernel.org>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1209111746420.22084@axis700.grange>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1209111746420.22084@axis700.grange>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org

On 09/11/2012 09:51 AM, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> This patch adds a document, describing common V4L2 device tree bindings.
> 
> Co-authored-by: Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com>
> Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@gmx.de>

Overall, I think this looks pretty reasonable, so:

Acked-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>

Just a couple comments:

> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/v4l2.txt

> +	ceu0: ceu@0xfe910000 {

> +		mclk: master_clock {
> +			compatible = "renesas,ceu-clock";
> +			#clock-cells = <1>;

Why 1? If there's only 1 clock output from this provider, I don't see a
need for any cells, unless there are some configuration flags?

> +			clock-frequency = <50000000>;	/* max clock frequency */
> +			clock-output-names = "mclk";
> +		};
> +
> +		port {
...
> +			ceu0_0: link@0 {
> +				reg = <0>;
> +				remote = <&csi2_2>;
> +				immutable;

Did we decide "immutable" was actually needed? Presumably the driver for
the HW in question knows the HW isn't configurable, and would simply not
attempt to apply any configuration even if the .dts author erroneously
provided some?

> +			};
> +		};
> +	};
> +
> +	i2c0: i2c@0xfff20000 {
...
> +		ov772x_1: camera@0x21 {
...
> +			clocks = <&mclk 0>;

So presumably that could just be "clocks = <&mclk>;"?