[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a1aae525-4d38-4520-a6c0-0905f87922fc@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 15:21:04 +0100
From: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>
To: Depeng Shao <quic_depengs@...cinc.com>, rfoss@...nel.org,
todor.too@...il.com, mchehab@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org,
krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel@...cinc.com, Yongsheng Li <quic_yon@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/13] media: qcom: camss: Add CSID Gen3 support for
sm8550
On 12/08/2024 15:41, Depeng Shao wrote:
> +#define CSID_RDI_CFG1(rdi) (0x510 + 0x100 * (rdi))
> +#define RDI_CFG1_DROP_H_EN 5
> +#define RDI_CFG1_DROP_V_EN 6
> +#define RDI_CFG1_CROP_H_EN 7
> +#define RDI_CFG1_CROP_V_EN 8
> +#define RDI_CFG1_PIX_STORE 10
Hmm - is bit 10 valid ? I'm looking at a register set derived from 8550
and don't see it
> +#define RDI_CFG1_PACKING_FORMAT 15
Bit 15 selects either BIT(15) = 0 PACKING_FORMAT_PLAIN or BIT(15) = 1
PACKING_FORMAT_MIPI
Please give this bit a more descriptive name =>
#define RDI_CFG1_PACKING_FORMAT_MIPI 15
---
bod
Powered by blists - more mailing lists