From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Laurent Pinchart Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 10/14] dt-bindings: Document the Rockchip ISP1 bindings Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 03:21:44 +0300 Message-ID: <20190816002144.GG5011@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> References: <20190730184256.30338-1-helen.koike@collabora.com> <20190730184256.30338-11-helen.koike@collabora.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190730184256.30338-11-helen.koike@collabora.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Helen Koike Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, eddie.cai.linux@gmail.com, kernel@collabora.com, heiko@sntech.de, Rob Herring , jacob2.chen@rock-chips.com, jeffy.chen@rock-chips.com, zyc@rock-chips.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tfiga@chromium.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, hans.verkuil@cisco.com, sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com, zhengsq@rock-chips.com, mchehab@kernel.org, ezequiel@collabora.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi Helen, Thank you for the patch. On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 03:42:52PM -0300, Helen Koike wrote: > From: Jacob Chen > > Add DT bindings documentation for Rockchip ISP1 > > Signed-off-by: Jacob Chen > Reviewed-by: Rob Herring > [update for upstream] > Signed-off-by: Helen Koike > > --- > > Changes in v8: None > Changes in v7: > - update document with new design and tested example > > .../bindings/media/rockchip-isp1.txt | 71 +++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 71 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-isp1.txt > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-isp1.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-isp1.txt > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..a97fef0f189f > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-isp1.txt If there wasn't enough work on your plate already I'd propose converting this to yaml, but I'll refrain from doing so :-) > @@ -0,0 +1,71 @@ > +Rockchip SoC Image Signal Processing unit v1 > +---------------------------------------------- > + > +Rockchip ISP1 is the Camera interface for the Rockchip series of SoCs > +which contains image processing, scaling, and compression funcitons. s/funcitons/functions/ > + > +Required properties: > +- compatible: value should be one of the following > + "rockchip,rk3288-cif-isp"; > + "rockchip,rk3399-cif-isp"; > +- reg : offset and length of the register set for the device. > +- interrupts: should contain ISP interrupt. > +- clocks: phandle to the required clocks. > +- clock-names: required clock name. > +- iommus: required a iommu node. > +- phys: the phandle for the PHY port > +- phy-names: must contain "dphy" > + > +port node > +------------------- > + > +The device node should contain one 'ports' child node, with children 'port' > +with child 'endpoint'. Extra . and line break ? > +nodes, according to the bindings defined in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ > +media/video-interfaces.txt. > + > +- endpoint(mipi): > + - remote-endpoint: Connecting to Rockchip MIPI-DPHY, > + which is defined in rockchip-mipi-dphy.txt. > + > +The port node must contain at least one endpoint, either parallel or mipi. If I understand things correctly, each ISP has a single CSI-2 receiver and a single parallel output, and can select one of them at runtime. This should be modelled as two separate ports. In addition to this, multiple CSI-2 sensors can be connected to the same CSI-2 receiver as long as all but one of them is held in reset (this is a poor man's CSI-2 switch, which exists in device out in the market, so we have to support that). This should be modelled by multiple endpoints in the CSI-2 port. > +It could have multiple endpoints, but please note the hardware don't support > +two sensors work at a time, they are supposed to work asynchronously. I assume you meant "are supposed to be mutually exclusive" or something similar ? > + > +Device node example > +------------------- > + > + isp0: isp0@ff910000 { > + compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-cif-isp"; > + reg = <0x0 0xff910000 0x0 0x4000>; > + interrupts = ; > + clocks = <&cru SCLK_ISP0>, > + <&cru ACLK_ISP0>, <&cru ACLK_ISP0_WRAPPER>, > + <&cru HCLK_ISP0>, <&cru HCLK_ISP0_WRAPPER>; > + clock-names = "clk_isp", > + "aclk_isp", "aclk_isp_wrap", > + "hclk_isp", "hclk_isp_wrap"; > + power-domains = <&power RK3399_PD_ISP0>; > + iommus = <&isp0_mmu>; > + phys = <&dphy>; > + phy-names = "dphy"; > + > + ports { > + #address-cells = <1>; > + #size-cells = <0>; > + > + port@0 { > + mipi_in_wcam: endpoint@0 { > + reg = <0>; > + remote-endpoint = <&wcam_out>; > + data-lanes = <1 2>; > + }; > + > + mipi_in_ucam: endpoint@1 { > + reg = <1>; > + remote-endpoint = <&ucam_out>; > + data-lanes = <1>; > + }; What are wcam and ucam ? It would help if you showed the sensor nodes in the example. > + }; > + }; > + }; -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart