Hi Sakari, Marco, On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 08:17:48PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote: > Hi Marco, > > On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 05:55:28PM +0100, Marco Felsch wrote: > > > > (more device specific) > > > > tc358746,default-mode = <CSI-Tx> /* Parallel-in -> CSI-out */ > > > > tc358746,default-mode = <CSI-Rx> /* CSI-in -> Parallel-out */ > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > (more generic) > > > > tc358746,default-dir = <PARALLEL_TO_CSI2> > > > > tc358746,default-dir = <CSI2_TO_PARALLEL> > > > > > > The prefix for Toshiba is "toshiba". What would you think of > > > "toshiba,csi2-direction" with values of either "rx" or "tx"? Or > > > "toshiba,csi2-mode" with either "master" or "slave", which would be a > > > little bit more generic, but could be slightly more probable to get wrong > > > as well. > > > > You're right mixed the prefix with the device.. If we need to introduce > > a property I would prefer the "toshiba,csi2-direction" one. I said if > > because as Jacopo mentioned we can avoid the property by define port@0 > > as input and port@1 as output. I tink that's the best solution, since we > > can avoid device specific bindings and it's common to use the last port > > as output (e.g. video-mux). > > The ports represent hardware and I think I would avoid reordering them. I > wonder what would the DT folks prefer. > I might have missed why you mention re-ordering? :) > The device specific property is to the point at least: it describes an > orthogonal part of the device configuration. That's why I'd pick that if I > were to choose. But I'll let Rob to comment on this. That's true indeed. Let's wait for inputs from DT people, I'm fine with both approaches. Thanks j > > -- > Regards, > > Sakari Ailus > sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
