From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75318C388F7 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 23:17:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 070F220759 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 23:17:23 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1603927044; bh=qkAXpSysgKo1NZ6R9MzhxEJKVMspafQ70cuRPVp+xG0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=I0tQ3+oVRXLxoWmTzAAeZF7yG7rjQtFuyKqjqqAG4RfkibbyctSpDnZwd1qT6XX1D OVtGgtqZeyZicdioBib+LYyvajLo5EyfIMNsVt6kkVHnU6fJ2vLH/8tch0Ado+iOsH ylVBhDM68+FYqLWxgesLQuTVJeTztjPwntvE9NVI= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390097AbgJ1XRX (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Oct 2020 19:17:23 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f67.google.com ([209.85.221.67]:46883 "EHLO mail-wr1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728511AbgJ1XRV (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Oct 2020 19:17:21 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f67.google.com with SMTP id n6so775616wrm.13; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 16:17:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=0DnG4LJjdv6mAxFeMJR8DGf+NctXJFLBf9GwLy+AxJQ=; b=o8dt85FiopWcGhXhpt25kIrlJBkT7xuHrqLVBo2fDOCuGnm7LJbaKxbp04x0/TQKC4 8JWvvjn3IUu4FSy/iWT85nQz4dMXhSOPL8187t64GzS9u0HARKocB4kGRZg5iokCfPPn XQCCYmL0jZDdTNlWO23UEQM6ORn2hvyP66lc68+t5S9djlRhfphA2VHhCvDmCXvzoOmC ZYMcNDVw0ZJw5A9B874xObT0KoE1tmf/YRaXl/6jRJrPMxcCaiPKaQzAyg4LJNOi6lNB 5ObO+rPjJqsZzC1BfcgXNsszs9e/w1f3lpepPjpmLbt6CjfEOC01A+JvQEredxLI3EHl ctGw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533RFgqbzdCd0F79yN4y6YolCk/UKzf8IDS2E9Mn/ntUkax3KcOe 43033a5xQlyAeF2N/IWaair532W+wEtnzWWE X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzfpLMuUvtJrSFwIFWjAp/ycvj6HKNRVF8qRIcs0RQFe6tX1Ju0ziEFEpJPgFr+LJbS453aoA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:204c:: with SMTP id pg12mr6158094ejb.464.1603874307610; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 01:38:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kozik-lap ([194.230.155.184]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id v6sm2525073ejj.112.2020.10.28.01.38.25 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 28 Oct 2020 01:38:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 09:38:24 +0100 From: Krzysztof Kozlowski To: Sakari Ailus Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Rob Herring , Shawn Guo , Sascha Hauer , Pengutronix Kernel Team , Fabio Estevam , NXP Linux Team , linux-media@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Rob Herring , Michael Turquette , Stephen Boyd , linux-clk@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] dt-bindings: media: imx258: add bindings for IMX258 sensor Message-ID: <20201028083824.GA32155@kozik-lap> References: <20201019170247.92002-1-krzk@kernel.org> <20201020103833.GT13341@paasikivi.fi.intel.com> <20201020120058.GU13341@paasikivi.fi.intel.com> <20201020122621.GA126891@kozik-lap> <20201020124654.GX13341@paasikivi.fi.intel.com> <20201020125852.GA128323@kozik-lap> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201020125852.GA128323@kozik-lap> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 02:58:52PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 03:46:54PM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 02:26:21PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 03:00:58PM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > > > Hi Krzysztof, > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 12:54:09PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 at 12:38, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Krzysztof, > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 07:02:44PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > > > > > Add bindings for the IMX258 camera sensor. The bindings, just like the > > > > > > > driver, are quite limited, e.g. do not support regulator supplies. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Rob Herring > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Changes since v4: > > > > > > > 1. Add clock-lanes, > > > > > > > 2. Add Rob's review, > > > > > > > 3. Add one more example and extend existing one, > > > > > > > 4. Add common clock properties (assigned-*). > > > > > > > > > > > > Using the assigned-* clock properties may be workable for this driver at > > > > > > the moment. But using these properties does not guarantee the external > > > > > > clock frequency intended to be used on the hardware. > > > > > > > > > > It guarantees it. The clock frequency will be as expected (except if > > > > > someone misconfigures the DTS). > > > > > > > > Is that guaranteed? > > > > > > > > I'm not saying no to the approach, but if we change how camera sensor DT > > > > bindings are defined, I'd prefer an informed decision is made on the > > > > matter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Using other > > > > > > frequencies *is not* expected to work. That applies to this driver as well. > > > > > > > > > > This is the binding which is HW description. According to HW datasheet > > > > > other frequencies from described range are accepted and expected to > > > > > work. > > > > > > > > As per datasheet, yes, different external clock frequencies can be used. > > > > But the link frequency is still not independent of the external clock > > > > frequency. > > > > > > > > The properties of the sensor's PLL tree determines what can be achieved > > > > given a certain external clock frequency. So picking a wrong external clock > > > > frequency quite possibly means that none of the designated link frequencies > > > > are available, rendering the sensor inoperable. > > > > > > The driver then controls the HW and knows exactly what is needed. If > > > link frequency (which has its own DT property) requires some clock > > > frequency, the driver will configure the clock to that value. The same > > > > Well it doesn't if it doesn't get that information from DT. > > It will get it - via clk_get_rate(). You do not need DT for this. > > > The frequency is usually a range, and looking at these bindings, it's from > > 6 MHz to 27 MHz. That'd be a lot of frequencies for a driver to try. > > It does not have to try all of them. Assuming link frequency is fixed, > just use any matching (or hard-coded) input clock frequency. Since the > input clock frequency most likely will be set with assigned-clock-rates, > there will be no job to do for the driver at all. Unless the driver > wants to do something more, of course. > > > > > > going other direction. Driver has the knowledge about both its input > > > clock and link frequency, therefore it can make the best decision. > > > > Again you're assuming a particular driver implementation. > > Actually not, I am talking about bindings as far away from the driver > implementation as possible. This is why some specific frequency *is > not* part of the bindings. > > > > > Typically only a few frequencies are really available on platforms, so a in > > practice a driver would not be able to get any requested frequency. I > > wouldn't start hard-coding every possible frequency to camera sensor > > drivers > > If the driver cannot get requested frequency which it apparently > requires, there is nothing more to do. It's broken HW implementation. > The input clock must be matching requirements, regardless of what > property you put in DT. You can add "clock-frequency" property, you can > even add "really-i-require-clock-frequency" but if the real HW input > clock does not have, it won't work. > > IOW, adding "clock-frequency" property does not change the reality - the > board (HW) must provide given frequency so the entire system works. > > > > > > > > > This, instead of the clock-frequency property, effectively removes the > > > > > > ability to set the correct frequency from the driver, at least with current > > > > > > set of the used APIs. > > > > > > > > > > It seems you confuse DT bindings with some specific driver > > > > > implementation. Bindings do not describe the driver behavior but the > > > > > HW. The ability to set the correct frequency from the driver is not > > > > > removed. It was never part of the bindings and never should. It is > > > > > part of the driver. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I suppose you could add a function to set the assigned clock frequency and > > > > > > keep it, just as clk_set_rate_exclusive does? > > > > > > I did not reply to this comment, so let me know. Of course, one could > > > add such functions. It's not a job for DT bindings, though. > > > > I'm not suggesting to add it to DT binding patch. What I'm saying that with > > this approach is looks like it may well be needed. > > New properties can always be added to DT. However existing properties > cannot be removed. Their meaning or values cannot be changed. Any more comments on the bindings or the patchset? Best regards, Krzysztof