Hi Sakari,
On Tue, 2018-11-27 at 15:50 +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> Hi Philipp,
>
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 02:39:27PM +0100, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> > Hi Sakari,
> >
> > On Tue, 2018-11-27 at 15:19 +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > Hi Marco,
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 11:02:53AM +0100, Marco Felsch wrote:
> > > > From: Enrico Scholz <enrico.scholz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > The chip can be configured to output data transitions on the
> > > > rising or falling edge of PIXCLK (Datasheet R58:1[9]), default is on the
> > > > falling edge.
> > > >
> > > > Parsing the fw-node is made in a subfunction to bundle all (future)
> > > > dt-parsing / fw-parsing stuff.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Enrico Scholz <enrico.scholz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > (m.grzeschik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx: Fix inverting clock. INV_PIX_CLOCK bit is set
> > > > per default. Set bit to 0 (enable mask bit without value) to enable
> > > > falling edge sampling.)
> > > > Signed-off-by: Michael Grzeschik <m.grzeschik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > (m.felsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx: use fwnode helpers)
> > > > (m.felsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx: mv fw parsing into own function)
> > > > (m.felsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx: adapt commit msg)
> > > > Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Applied with the following diff:
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/mt9m111.c b/drivers/media/i2c/mt9m111.c
> > > index 2ef332b9b914..b6011bfddde8 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/media/i2c/mt9m111.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/mt9m111.c
> > > @@ -1172,24 +1172,24 @@ static int mt9m111_video_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> > >
> > > static int mt9m111_probe_fw(struct i2c_client *client, struct mt9m111 *mt9m111)
> > > {
> > > - struct v4l2_fwnode_endpoint *bus_cfg;
> > > + struct v4l2_fwnode_endpoint bus_cfg = {
> > > + .bus_type = V4L2_MBUS_PARALLEL
> > > + };
> > > struct fwnode_handle *np;
> > > - int ret = 0;
> > > + int ret;
> > >
> > > np = fwnode_graph_get_next_endpoint(dev_fwnode(&client->dev), NULL);
> > > if (!np)
> > > return -EINVAL;
> > >
> > > - bus_cfg = v4l2_fwnode_endpoint_alloc_parse(np);
> > > - if (IS_ERR(bus_cfg)) {
> > > - ret = PTR_ERR(bus_cfg);
> > > + ret = v4l2_fwnode_endpoint_alloc_parse(np, &bus_cfg);
> >
> > Should that be
> >
> > + ret = v4l2_fwnode_endpoint_parse(np, &bus_cfg);
> >
> > intead?
>
> Could be. I'd expect the driver to need the link frequency at some point
> after which you'd need the variable size properties anyway. But that's not
> the case now.
I don't think the link-frequencies property will be used, this is just a
parallel device. But Marco chose to use _alloc_parse because of what the
v4l2_fwnode_endpoint_parse() documentation says:
/*
* NOTE: This function does not parse properties the size of which is variable
* without a low fixed limit. Please use v4l2_fwnode_endpoint_alloc_parse() in
* new drivers instead.
*/
So maybe we want to use v4l2_fwnode_endpoint_alloc_parse() always. There
is no unnecessary allocation, just a lookup of the non-existing link-
frequencies property.
regards
Philipp
