On 15/12/2020 10:28, Daniel Scally wrote: > Morning Sakari > > On 30/11/2020 20:35, Sakari Ailus wrote: >>> +/* >>> + * Extend this array with ACPI Hardware ID's of devices known to be working. >>> + * Do not add a HID for a sensor that is not actually supported. >>> + */ >>> +static const char * const cio2_supported_devices[] = { >>> + "INT33BE", >>> + "OVTI2680", >> I guess we don't have the known-good frequencies for the CSI-2 bus in >> firmware? >> >> One option would be to put there what the drivers currently use. This >> assumes the support for these devices is, well, somewhat opportunistic but >> I guess there's no way around that right now at least. >> >> As the systems are laptops, they're likely somewhat less prone to EMI >> issues to begin with than mobile phones anyway. > Just looking at this; we're currently using this with the ov2680 driver > that's in mainline currently (with very minor tweaks) plus a > hacked-into-roughly-working version of the atomisp-ov5693 driver (ACPI > ID INT33BE = ov5693 physical device). Neither of those drivers lists any > link frequencies, nor provides a link frequency control for v4l2 to work > with. > > On the other hand, the ov5648 [1] and ov8865 [2] drivers which Paul has > submitted recently Forgot to actually link these: [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-media/20201211154027.153535-1-paul.kocialkowski@xxxxxxxxxxx/T/#m5eb18611b7df1538ed4924422583b62cc61dbfae [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-media/20201211154428.153762-1-paul.kocialkowski@xxxxxxxxxxx/T/#m6d4fd5e590b1c4583d4a74f5ae938ea011408640