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

Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Date:   Thu, 24 Feb 2022 22:26:40 +0100
From:   Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@...e.com>
To:     Jean-Michel Hautbois <jeanmichel.hautbois@...asonboard.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 Jean-Michel,

Am 24.02.22 um 18:07 schrieb Jean-Michel Hautbois:
> 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 don't think this should be split, because these belong together
(dt-binding, driver, device tree changes).
>
>>
>> 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 :-)) ?

With these 2 patches applied, both drivers won't work which is a
regression. Yes, it would be the best to have unicam disabled per
default and some kind of imx219 overlay should enable it. But at least
the unexpected (not for you or me but all the other reviewer)
consequence should have been in the commit log.

>From my understand the unicam driver is not a fully replacement for the
bcm2835-camera or am i wrong?

Best regards

>
> Thanks,
> JM
>
>>
>> Best regards
>> Stefan
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

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