[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1369118d-3311-f12e-e5d7-a981969baaaa@ideasonboard.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2023 10:26:16 +0200
From: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...asonboard.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-media@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>,
Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>,
Matti Vaittinen <Matti.Vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@...asonboard.com>,
Michael Tretter <m.tretter@...gutronix.de>,
Shawn Tu <shawnx.tu@...el.com>,
Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>,
Mike Pagano <mpagano@...too.org>,
Krzysztof HaĆasa <khalasa@...p.pl>,
Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/8] dt-bindings: media: add bindings for TI DS90UB953
Hi Rob,
On 09/12/2022 23:27, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 08, 2022 at 12:40:02PM +0200, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>> Add DT bindings for TI DS90UB953 FPDLink-3 Serializer.
>
> Seems like this and DS90UB913 binding could be combined. I couldn't spot
> a difference.
They are indeed quite similar, but there are a few diffs, especially
after fixing Laurent's review comments.
E.g, as the UB913 is a parallel video serializer and the UB953 is a
CSI-2 serializer, the input port on UB913 has 'pclk-sample' property but
UB953 has 'data-lanes' property. The descriptions differ also a bit for
the above mentioned difference.
The above points would still allow combining the bindings, though. But I
feel the UB913 is somewhat a different class of serializer device
compared to UB953 (and UB971 which the UB953's binding also supports),
so my gut feeling says it's better to keep them separate. But I don't
have much experience on maintaining such bindings, and, afaik, we could
always split the bindings later if needed.
So... Do you have a preference on either way? Or maybe we can come back
to this after I send the next version with the updates.
> In the subjects, drop 'binding for'. The prefix says this is a binding.
> Maybe add 'Serializer'.
Ok.
Tomi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists