Re: [PATCH v6 0/8] Move device tree graph parsing helpers to drivers/of

Sylwester Nawrocki
2014-03-06T15:47:30Z

On 06/03/14 16:17, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Thu, 06 Mar 2014 14:16:57 +0000
> Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> escreveu:
>
>> > On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 03:42:34PM +0100, Philipp Zabel wrote:
>>> > > Am Mittwoch, den 05.03.2014, 13:35 +0200 schrieb Tomi Valkeinen:
>>>> > > > Hi,
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > On 05/03/14 11:20, Philipp Zabel wrote:
>>>>> > > > > Hi,
>>>>> > > > >
>>>>> > > > > this version of the OF graph helper move series further addresses a few of
>>>>> > > > > Tomi's and Sylwester's comments.
>>>>> > > > >
>>>>> > > > > Changes since v5:
>>>>> > > > > - Fixed spelling errors and a wrong device node name in the link section
>>>>> > > > > - Added parentless previous endpoint's full name to warning
>>>>> > > > > - Fixed documentation comment for of_graph_parse_endpoint
>>>>> > > > > - Unrolled for-loop in of_graph_get_remote_port_parent
>>>>> > > > >
>>>>> > > > > Philipp Zabel (8):
>>>>> > > > > [media] of: move graph helpers from drivers/media/v4l2-core to
>>>>> > > > > drivers/of
>>>>> > > > > Documentation: of: Document graph bindings
>>>>> > > > > of: Warn if of_graph_get_next_endpoint is called with the root node
>>>>> > > > > of: Reduce indentation in of_graph_get_next_endpoint
>>>>> > > > > [media] of: move common endpoint parsing to drivers/of
>>>>> > > > > of: Implement simplified graph binding for single port devices
>>>>> > > > > of: Document simplified graph binding for single port devices
>>>>> > > > > of: Warn if of_graph_parse_endpoint is called with the root node
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > So, as I've pointed out, I don't agree with the API, as it's too limited
>>>> > > > and I can't use it, but as this series is (mostly) about moving the
>>>> > > > current API to a common place, it's fine for me.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Acked-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks. I'll be happy to help expanding the API to parse ports
>>> > > individually, once this gets accepted.
>>> > >
>>> > > Mauro, Guennadi, are you fine with how this turned out? I'd like to get
>>> > > your acks again, for the changed location.
>
> From my side, there's nothing on such code that is V4L2 specific.
> Moving it to drivers/of makes sense on my eyes.
>
> Acked-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <m.chehab@samsung.com>

I'm OK with patches 1...5, 8, so for these:

Acked-by: Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com>

Regarding the simplified version of the binding, I thought we should
leave 'port' instead of 'endpoint' node. This could cover more hardware
configurations. Are there any users of this simplified binding queued
for v3.15 ? If not, perhaps we can postpone it and discuss it a bit more
(sorry, couldn't find time to comment on that earlier) ?

>> > I'll need those acks before I can even think about queuing up the
>> > imx-drm bits.
>> >
>> > Another way to deal with this is if this gets pulled into the V4L tree
>> > from Philipp's git tree, I can also pull that in myself. What mustn't
>> > happen is for these to be committed independently as patches.
>
> If everyone agrees, I actually prefer have this patch applied on my tree,
> in order to avoid some potential merge conflicts at the merge window,
> as we might have other drivers and changes there touching on those API
> calls (I'm aware of a series of patches from Sylwester with some DT
> stuff on it. Not sure if it would be affected by such changes or not).

Yes, it's going to conflict with my patch series. I thought it could be
put onto a stable a topic branch, e.g. at git://linuxtv.org/media_tree.git,
which could be then pulled into the media master branch and anywhere
else it is needed ?

--
Regards,
Sylwester