> On July 13, 2020 10:15 AM Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The difference as far as I can tell is only in the bindings. The older > 'adi,adv7180' compatibility string only describes where the adv7180 is > transmitting the data it collects from an undescribed connector. While > the more recent compat string 'adi,adv7180cp' describes both the > destination and the connector. A good example as you point out is to > compare koelsch with gose. From a V4L2 point of view the connector being > described does not effect the capture operation. > > Ulrich maybe you can help us shed some light on this as you added the > new compat strings? Executive summary: "[Laurent and Hans] agreed that DT should model physical ports." Full details: https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg103799.html The reason why it's only in Gose is that that was the patch series that raised the issue, and we didn't update the existing implementations. CU Uli
