Hi Sylwester, On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 04:28:22PM +0200, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote: > On 25/05/15 14:50, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: > >> On 23/05/15 14:03, Sakari Ailus wrote: > >>> >> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 03:28:40PM +0200, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote: > >>>> >>> flash-leds = <&flash_xx &image_sensor_x>, <...>; > >>> >> > >>> >> One more matter to consider: xenon flash devices. > >>> >> > >>> >> How about samsung,camera-flashes (and ti,camera-flashes)? After pondering > >>> >> this awhile, I'm ok with removing the vendor prefix as well. > >>> >> > >>> >> Let me know what you think. > >> > > >> > I thought about it a bit more and I have some doubts about semantics > >> > as above. I'm fine with 'camera-flashes' as far as name is concerned. > >> > > >> > Perhaps we should put only phandles to leds or xenon flash devices > >> > in the 'camera-flashes' property. I think it would be more future > >> > proof in case there is more nodes needed to describe the camera flash > >> > (or a camera module) than the above two. And phandles to corresponding > >> > image sensor device nodes would be put in a separate property. > > > > Could you give examples of the cases you are thinking of? > > I don't have any examples in mind ATM, I just wanted to point out > the above convention might not be flexible enough. Especially since > we already know there is more sub-devices within the camera module > than just flashes and image sensors. I have to admit I've never seen a camera module with an integrated flash. The lens is part of the module but typically flash is not. That doesn't say there aren't such devices though. -- Kind regards, Sakari Ailus e-mail: sakari.ailus@xxxxxx XMPP: sailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- 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
