Hi Dave,
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 12:31:34PM +0000, Dave Stevenson wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 at 22:45, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 09:18:08AM +0100, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
> > > Add both MIPI CSI-2 nodes in the core bcm2711 tree. Use the 3-cells
> > > interrupt declaration, corresponding clocks and default as disabled.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jean-Michel Hautbois <jeanmichel.hautbois@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm2711.dtsi | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm2711.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm2711.dtsi
> > > index dff18fc9a906..077141df7024 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm2711.dtsi
> > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm2711.dtsi
> > > @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
> > >
> > > #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
> > > #include <dt-bindings/soc/bcm2835-pm.h>
> > > +#include <dt-bindings/power/raspberrypi-power.h>
> > >
> > > / {
> > > compatible = "brcm,bcm2711";
> > > @@ -293,6 +294,36 @@ hvs: hvs@7e400000 {
> > > interrupts = <GIC_SPI 97 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> > > };
> > >
> > > + csi0: csi1@7e800000 {
> >
> > The node name should be csi@7e800000, not csi1@7e800000. Now, this will
> > probably cause issues with the firmware that looks for csi1 (and csi0 ?)
> > to hand over control of the Unicam CSI-2 receiver to the kernel. I
> > wonder if this is something that could be handled by a firmware update,
> > to also recognize nodes named "csi" ?
>
> It already looks for any node starting "csi". If you check the
> downstream DT [1], then the nodes are "csi0: csi@7e800000" and "csi1:
> csi@7e801000".
Oops, indeed. I think I was misled by
https://github.com/raspberrypi/linux/blob/rpi-5.10.y/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/bcm2835-unicam.txt
that mentions "csi0" and "csi1".
It's all good then. Jean-Michel, can you update the DT bindings in the
next iteration of the series to correct the DT node naming ?
> There is no actual action required to hand the peripheral over to the
> kernel, it just prevents the firmware from using it and causing
> problems (it masks out the interrupt, and that's checked as part of
> the firmware initialising the peripheral).
>
> If using imx219 or one of the other sensors supported by the firmware,
> "vcgencmd get_camera" should report that the sensor isn't detected,
> and "sudo vcdbg log msg" should have a line similar to
> "020174.613: camsubs: Ignoring camera 0 as unicam device not available"
>
> Dave
>
> [1] https://github.com/raspberrypi/linux/blob/rpi-5.10.y/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm270x.dtsi#L88
>
> > > + compatible = "brcm,bcm2835-unicam";
> > > + reg = <0x7e800000 0x800>,
> > > + <0x7e802000 0x4>;
> > > + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 102 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> > > + clocks = <&clocks BCM2835_CLOCK_CAM0>,
> > > + <&firmware_clocks 4>;
> > > + clock-names = "lp", "vpu";
> > > + power-domains = <&power RPI_POWER_DOMAIN_UNICAM0>;
> > > + #address-cells = <1>;
> > > + #size-cells = <0>;
> > > + #clock-cells = <1>;
> >
> > Why do you need #address-cells, #size-cells and #clock-cells ? They're
> > not mentioned in the binding.
> >
> > > + status="disabled";
> >
> > Missing spaces around the =.
> >
> > Same comment for the next node.
> >
> > > + };
> > > +
> > > + csi1: csi1@7e801000 {
> > > + compatible = "brcm,bcm2835-unicam";
> > > + reg = <0x7e801000 0x800>,
> > > + <0x7e802004 0x4>;
> > > + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 103 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> > > + clocks = <&clocks BCM2835_CLOCK_CAM1>,
> > > + <&firmware_clocks 4>;
> > > + clock-names = "lp", "vpu";
> > > + power-domains = <&power RPI_POWER_DOMAIN_UNICAM1>;
> > > + #address-cells = <1>;
> > > + #size-cells = <0>;
> > > + #clock-cells = <1>;
> > > + status="disabled";
> > > + };
> > > +
> > > pixelvalve3: pixelvalve@7ec12000 {
> > > compatible = "brcm,bcm2711-pixelvalve3";
> > > reg = <0x7ec12000 0x100>;
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
