On 3/8/24 16:07, Conor Dooley wrote:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 03:08:12PM +0100, Julien Massot wrote:
On 3/7/24 20:21, Conor Dooley wrote:
On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 04:26:06PM +0100, Julien Massot wrote:
Add DT bindings for Maxim MAX96714 GMSL2 Deserializer.
Signed-off-by: Julien Massot <julien.massot@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Change since v3:
- Renamed file to maxim,max96714.yaml dropped the 'f' suffix
Why? The filename should match the compatible, which /does/ have an f.
All the work has been done on MAX96714F variant of this Maxim GMSL2
deserializer.
The driver and the binding remain suitable for all variants of this chipset,
since they share the same
register mapping, similar features etc..
MAX96714 exists in different variant: MAX96714 / MAX96714F / MAX96714K that
will be easy
to add support for this binding and driver later.
Either document the non-f version if it really is that similar, using
all of the same properties, or name the file after the version you've
actually documented. I don't see why this particular case should be
given an exception to how bindings are named.
What is the actual difference between the f and non f versions? Is it
visible to software?
Yes there are a few differences visible to the software, for example the
GMSL
link rate since MAX96714 support 6 and 3 Gbps, while MAX96714F only
supports 3Gbps.
the registers map is the same, but a few values are not possible with
the 'f' version.
I will add a compatible for the non 'f' version, and will do the same
for the max96717 binding.
--
Julien Massot
Senior Software Engineer
Collabora Ltd.
Platinum Building, St John's Innovation Park, Cambridge CB4 0DS, UK
Registered in England & Wales, no. 5513718
