Hi again, On 2018-01-26 01:23:58 +0100, Niklas Söderlund wrote: [snip] > > > > Furthermore, as explained in a comment I made when reviewing the VIN patch > > series, I wonder whether we shouldn't identify the CSI-2 receiver instances by > > ID the same way we do with the VIN instances (using the renesas,id property). > > In that case I think the endpoint numbering won't matter. > > The endpoint numbering here plays no part in identify the CSI-2 receiver > instances nor dose it carry any other information. I still think it's > neat to define the binding like this as it more explicit and IMHO this > makes it easier to understand. I now see that the commit message implies that they do matter but this is wrong. It was true before the 'renesas,id' was added to the VIN bindings, but as having cross dependences on bindings are bad this is no longer the case. I will remove that paragraph for the next version. Sorry for the noise. -- Regards, Niklas Söderlund -- 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
