linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: Pinefeat cef168 lens control board

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <c1b848b9-b1da-4976-9838-d474394a0992@kernel.org>
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2025 09:14:24 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Aliaksandr Smirnou <support@...efeat.co.uk>
Cc: conor+dt@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
 mchehab@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: Pinefeat cef168 lens control board

On 14/08/2025 22:10, Aliaksandr Smirnou wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Aug 2025 11:04:10 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> You describe here the entire board, not the MCU only or lens motor
>> only...
> 
> Since you asked about 5 V, I was explaining that this power source is not
> relevant for the driver.
> 
>> Can the board be used outside of above setup? I understand so far this
>> is only for Rpi where both above supplies - 3.3 V and 5 V - are coming
>> from the header pins, so supplies would be totally redundant.
> 
> There are several variants of the board, differing only in physical size
> and type of CSI connector, targeting different cameras. The board should
> be compatible with any single-board computer that uses a similar CSI
> connector pinout and MIPI signal lane assignment. For example, the NVIDIA
> Jetson series replicates the Raspberry Pi camera and GPIO header pinout.
> So yes, the board can be used outside of a Raspberry Pi setup.

If they replicate also power coming from the header and CSI line, then
it's fine, but if the do not, then you would need a controllable
regulator supply.

> 
> As noted above, these supplies are redundant and were not included in the
> driver description. Given that, is it acceptable to remove the vcc-supply
> property?

Yeah, for simplicity. Please mention this rationale in the commit msg -
power supply is derived from fixed supplies (connector/header on RPi),
so representing it is redundant.


Best regards,
Krzysztof