Am Mittwoch, den 11.06.2014, 13:38 +0200 schrieb Philipp Zabel:
> Am Samstag, den 07.06.2014, 14:56 -0700 schrieb Steve Longerbeam:
> [...]
> > +&ipu1 {
> > + status = "okay";
> > +
> > + v4l2-capture {
> > + compatible = "fsl,imx6-v4l2-capture";
>
> I'm not happy with adding the simple-bus compatible to the ipu
> device tree node just to instantiate a virtual subdevice. See
> my comment in the following mail. I think it would be better to
> create this platform device from code, not from the device tree
> if something is connected to ipu port@0 or port@1, see below.
>
> > + #address-cells = <1>;
> > + #size-cells = <0>;
> > + status = "okay";
> > + pinctrl-names = "default";
> > + pinctrl-0 = <
> > + &pinctrl_ipu1_csi0_1
> > + &pinctrl_ipu1_csi0_data_en
> > + >;
> > +
> > + /* CSI0 */
> > + port@0 {
>
> That port really is a property of the IPU itself. I have left
> space for ports 0 and 1 when specifying the IPU output interfaces
> as port 2 (DI0) and 3 (DI1).
Shawn Guo's for-next tree contains the CSI ports in
1fbf4ad8e1983732aa6a1de10da0bfcc7384f626
regards
Philipp
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
