* Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx> [141117 02:17]: > On Mon 2014-11-17 11:09:45, Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Monday 17 November 2014 11:05:19 Pavel Machek wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > > > On Mon 2014-11-17 09:43:19, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > On Sunday 16 November 2014 08:59:28 Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > > For device tree people: Yes, I know I'll have to create > > > > > file in documentation, but does the binding below look > > > > > acceptable? > > > > > > > > > > I'll clean up driver code a bit more, remove the printks. > > > > > Anything else obviously wrong? > > > > > > > > I think that this patch is probably not good and specially > > > > not for n900. adp1653 should be registered throw omap3 isp > > > > camera subsystem which does not have DT support yet. > > > > > > Can you explain? > > > > > > adp1653 is independend device on i2c bus, and we have kernel > > > driver for it (unlike rest of n900 camera system). Just now > > > it is unusable due to lack of DT binding. It has two > > > functions, LED light and a camera flash; yes, the second one > > > should be integrated to the rest of camera system, but that > > > is not yet merged. That should not prevent us from merging DT > > > support for the flash, so that this part can be > > > tested/maintained. > > > > > > > Ok. When ISP camera subsystem has DT support somebody will modify > > n900 DT to add camera flash from adp1653 to ISP... I believe it > > will not be hard. > > Exactly. And yes, I'd like to get complete camera support for n900 > merged. But first step is "make sure existing support does not break". There's nothing stopping us from initializing the camera code from pdata-quirks.c for now to keep it working. Certainly the binding should be added to the driver, but that removes a dependency to the legacy booting mode if things are otherwise working. Regards, Tony -- 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
