linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5.1 2/2] ARM: dts: bcm2711: Add unicam CSI nodes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <944bdedc-afbb-e427-bd1d-676f8ed21a48@ideasonboard.com>
Date:   Thu, 24 Feb 2022 18:07:41 +0100
From:   Jean-Michel Hautbois <jeanmichel.hautbois@...asonboard.com>
To:     Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@...e.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com, sbranden@...adcom.com,
        rjui@...adcom.com, f.fainelli@...il.com, nsaenz@...nel.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com,
        dave.stevenson@...pberrypi.com, naush@...pberrypi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5.1 2/2] ARM: dts: bcm2711: Add unicam CSI nodes

Hi Stefan,

On 24/02/2022 18:03, Stefan Wahren wrote:
> Hi Jean-Michel,
> 
> the version v5.1 is a little bit confusing, because it looks like to be
> applied to stable linux-5.1, which is not intended.

Sorry for the confusion, I don't want to send a full v6 now, as it will 
need to be rebased on top of the multiplexed streams series in its v11 
which is not yet posted on the ML :-).

> 
> Am 23.02.22 um 15:34 schrieb Jean-Michel Hautbois:
>> Add both MIPI CSI-2 nodes in the core bcm2711 tree. Use the 3-cells
>> interrupt declaration, corresponding clocks and default as disabled.
>>
>> Thanks to Stefan Wahren for his guidance on how to deal with different
>> RPi variants.
> 
> Can you please explain why you split these patches from the original series?

Because the firmware clocks are independent from the csi nodes and so, 
it sounded logical to split it in half ?

> 
> I didn't had the time to test, but applying these patches would
> "disable" bcm2835-camera driver?

Wasn't it already the case ? It is intended, we don't want those to be 
"okay" by default ? Or do I miss your point maybe (probably :-)) ?

Thanks,
JM

> 
> Best regards
> Stefan
> 
>