[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <32d36aba-9d7c-45f7-ab04-cb28ef31d159@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2025 12:29:17 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@...natech.se>
Cc: Dave Stevenson <dave.stevenson@...pberrypi.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, imx@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: media: i2c: imx219: Remove redundant
description of data-lanes
On 02/04/2025 11:57, Niklas Söderlund wrote:
>>
>>> Support four-lane operation") the driver errored out if not 2 lanes
>>> where used, and after it if not 2 or 4 lanes where used.
>>
>> Then... fix the driver?
>>
>> This property describes hardware, not driver. Why current driver
>> implementation, e.g. 1 year ago or now, would change the hardware (so
>> the bindings)?
>
> I agree, I thought that here we have a case where the bindings predate
> the standardisation. The driver do not match the bindings, in fact it
> breaks if the imx219 specific instructions are followed. So the risk of
> breaking stuff is likely low. And this was an opportunity to align the
> imx219 with video-interfaces.yaml.
I am sorry, but what breaks exactly?
Is the device supporting two and four lanes setups? If yes, then the
binding is correct.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists