linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] media: dt-bindings: ti,ds90ub960: Add bindings for DS90UB954-Q1

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <d02d7c3f-adb7-4dda-8178-19af188ff90a@ti.com>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2025 11:05:50 +0530
From: Yemike Abhilash Chandra <y-abhilashchandra@...com>
To: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...asonboard.com>
CC: <hverkuil@...all.nl>, <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
        <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>, <vaishnav.a@...com>,
        <u-kumar1@...com>, <jai.luthra@...ux.dev>,
        <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        <robh@...nel.org>, <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] media: dt-bindings: ti,ds90ub960: Add bindings for
 DS90UB954-Q1

Hi Tomi,

Thanks for the review.

On 27/05/25 10:30, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 23/05/2025 11:36, Yemike Abhilash Chandra wrote:
>> DS90UB954-Q1 is an FPDLink-III deserializer that is mostly register
>> compatible with DS90UB960-Q1. The main difference is that it supports
>> half of the RX and TX ports, i.e. 2x FPDLink RX ports and 1x CSI TX
>> port. Therefore, add support for DS90UB954 within the existing bindings.
>>
>> Link: https://www.ti.com/lit/gpn/ds90ub954-q1
>> Signed-off-by: Yemike Abhilash Chandra <y-abhilashchandra@...com>
>> ---
>>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/i2c/ti,ds90ub960.yaml | 1 +
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/i2c/ti,ds90ub960.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/i2c/ti,ds90ub960.yaml
>> index 4dcbd2b039a5..b2d4300d7846 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/i2c/ti,ds90ub960.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/i2c/ti,ds90ub960.yaml
>> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ allOf:
>>   properties:
>>     compatible:
>>       enum:
>> +      - ti,ds90ub954-q1
>>         - ti,ds90ub960-q1
>>         - ti,ds90ub9702-q1
>>   
> 
> Does this pass the dt checks? The binding lists ports 0-5 as required.

Thanks for pointing this out. It is passing DT checks since we have marked
port 4 and port 5 as disabled in DT, but I now understand that approach is
not acceptable.

Ports 0–3 are documented as FPD-Link inputs, but on UB954, only ports 0 
and 1 are inputs,
while port 2 is CSI TX. Should I conditionally modify required ports for 
UB954(0-2) and
UB960/UB9702 (0-5), even though port 2's description would mismatch?
(In bindings it would be described as FPD-Link input but it will be 
modeled as CSI TX in DT).

Alternatively, we can describe the ports block separately for each 
compatible to
ensure correctness. Please let me know which approach you prefer.

Thanks and Regards,
Abhilash Chandra


> 
>   Tomi
>