[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <eac3a877-a4aa-4789-9013-ab8b6c91e0f3@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2025 18:30:50 +0300
From: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir.zapolskiy@...aro.org>
To: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>,
Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir.zapolskiy@...aro.org>,
Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>, Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
Cc: Bryan O'Donoghue <bod@...nel.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] phy: qcom-mipi-csi2: Add a CSI2 MIPI D-PHY driver
On 7/14/25 18:17, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> On 14/07/2025 15:58, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>>
>> This proposed device node scheme does not solve the known and already
>> discussed technical issue expectedly, namely there is no given way
>> to describe a combo mode hardware configuration, when two independant
>> sensors are wired to the same CSIPHY. This is an unsolvable problem
>> with this design.
>
> I think that is genuinely something we should handle in camss-csid.c
> maybe with some meta-data inside of the ports/endpoints..
>
This is a CSIPHY property, a CSIPHY hardware configuration and a wiring
of sensors to a CSIPHY. Where is the relation to CSID here? There is no.
Please share at least a device tree node description, which supports
a connection of two sensors to a single CSIPHY, like it shall be done
expectedly.
--
Best wishes,
Vladimir
Powered by blists - more mailing lists