Re: [PATCH v8 05/17] dt-bindings: media: Add bindings for ARM mali-c55

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 06/11/2024 14:57, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> On Wed, Nov 06, 2024 at 01:15:23PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 06, 2024 at 10:05:22AM +0000, Daniel Scally wrote:
>>> Add the yaml binding for ARM's Mali-C55 Image Signal Processor.
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Nayden Kanchev <nayden.kanchev@xxxxxxx>
>>> Co-developed-by: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo.mondi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo.mondi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Scally <dan.scally@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> Changes in v8:
>>>
>>> 	- Added the video clock back in. Now that we have actual hardware it's
>>> 	  clear that it's necessary.
>>> 	- Added reset lines 
>>> 	- Dropped R-bs
>>
>> These are trivial, so I wish you kept the review... but since you ask,
>> then comment further
>>
>> I recommend using b4, so your cover letter changelog comes with nice
>> links to previous versions. I scrolled through entire cover letter for
>> this (for me that's almost the only point of cover letter) and could
>> not find them. Anyway, just a remark.
>>
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> +  resets:
>>> +    items:
>>> +      - description: vclk domain reset
>>> +      - description: aclk domain reset
>>> +      - description: hclk domain reset
>>> +
>>> +  reset-names:
>>> +    items:
>>> +      - const: vresetn
>>
>> drop "reset", it's redundant and rather come here with logical name. I
>> wonder what "n" means as well. It's not a GPIO to be "inverted"...
> 
> The aresetn and hresetn names come directly from a hardware manual
> (vresetn seems to be called rstn in that document though). As far as I
> understand, they are the names of the external signals of the IP core.
> I tend to pick the hardware names for clock and reset names. That makes
> it easier for integrators, and from a driver point of view it doesn't
> change much as DT names are just a convention anyway.
> 
> That being said, if there's a good reason to do otherwise (such as
> standardizing property names to make handling through common code
> possible), that's fine too.

If these are from manual then it is fine, although sometimes the names
are really pointless in manual...

Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>

Best regards,
Krzysztof





[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]


  Powered by Linux