On Tuesday 28 February 2017 07:56 PM, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@xxxxxx> wrote: >> On Tuesday 28 February 2017 04:22 AM, Rob Herring wrote: >>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 02:43:47PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: >>>> Add an optional property - enable-gpios - which can be used to specify >>>> the GPIOs that must be requested to select the vpif functionality. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/ti,da850-vpif.txt | 7 +++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/ti,da850-vpif.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/ti,da850-vpif.txt >>>> index df7182a..23c5405 100644 >>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/ti,da850-vpif.txt >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/ti,da850-vpif.txt >>>> @@ -13,6 +13,9 @@ Required properties: >>>> - reg: physical base address and length of the registers set for the device; >>>> - interrupts: should contain IRQ line for the VPIF >>>> >>>> +Optional properties: >>>> +- enable-gpios: phandle of the GPIOs used to select the vpif functionality >>> >>> What does this control exactly? The GPIOs belong in the node they are >>> connected to and having GPIOs routed to this block seems strange. >> >> The DA850 EVM board implements on-board muxing which lets the video >> input (via VPIF) to be routed to a TVP5147 (video decoder) for composite >> input or to a camera header. There are other mux options which use the >> same VPIF SoC pins (RMII ethernet or character LCD). >> >> There is a three-to-eight demux on the board which drives enable signals >> to buffers letting you choose from these options. >> >> From your response, it looks like you want the enable-gpios property to >> be in the TVP5147 or camera node. That does make sense to me. > > Well, seems like they should be part of a mux node. I'd suggest you > look at the video-multiplexer binding under review[1]. > > Though for other non video functions, that would be some sort of board > level pin mux control. There's a new mux binding too, maybe that would > work. In any case, it shouldn't be the VPIF driver controlling the > GPIOs directly. Yeah, since there are non-video functions involved, we need a more generic mux binding. I see the work Peter Rosin is doing[1]. Its not in linux-next yet, but seems quite near merging. [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/2/8/394 Thanks, Sekhar -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
