[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1755937.SSGT2MZJMC@avalon>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 15:13:38 +0100
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
To: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...com>
Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <m.chehab@...sung.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>,
Philipp Zabel <philipp.zabel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] [media] of: move graph helpers from drivers/media/v4l2-core to drivers/of
Hi Tomi,
On Friday 21 March 2014 15:37:17 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> On 21/03/14 00:32, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > The OF graph bindings documentation could just specify the ports node as
> > optional and mandate individual device bindings to specify it as mandatory
> > or forbidden (possibly with a default behaviour to avoid making all
> > device bindings too verbose).
>
> Isn't it so that if the device has one port, it can always do without
> 'ports', but if it has multiple ports, it always has to use 'ports' so
> that #address-cells and #size-cells can be defined?
You can put the #address-cells and #size-cells property in the device node
directly without requiring a ports subnode.
> If so, there's nothing left for the individual device bindings to decide.
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (491 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists