Hi Jacopo,
Thank you for the patch.
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 06:41:36PM +0100, Jacopo Mondi wrote:
> The OV10635 image sensor embedded in the camera module is currently
> reset after the MAX9271 initialization with two long delays that were
> most probably not correctly characterized.
>
> Re-work the image sensor reset procedure by holding the chip in reset
> during the MAX9271 configuration, removing the long sleep delays and
> only wait after the chip exits from reset for 350-500 microseconds
> interval, which is larger than the minimum (2048 * (1 / XVCLK)) timeout
> characterized in the chip manual.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/media/i2c/rdacm20.c | 25 +++++++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/rdacm20.c b/drivers/media/i2c/rdacm20.c
> index e982373908f2..ea30cc936531 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/rdacm20.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/rdacm20.c
> @@ -477,6 +477,15 @@ static int rdacm20_initialize(struct rdacm20_device *dev)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> + /* Hold OV10635 in reset during max9271 configuration. */
> + ret = max9271_enable_gpios(&dev->serializer, MAX9271_GPIO1OUT);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ret = max9271_clear_gpios(&dev->serializer, MAX9271_GPIO1OUT);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
Unrelated to this patch, it could be nice to rename the GPIO-related
functions to use a similar naming scheme as the gpiod API.
> ret = max9271_configure_gmsl_link(&dev->serializer);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
> @@ -490,23 +499,11 @@ static int rdacm20_initialize(struct rdacm20_device *dev)
> return ret;
> dev->serializer.client->addr = dev->addrs[0];
>
> - /*
> - * Reset the sensor by cycling the OV10635 reset signal connected to the
> - * MAX9271 GPIO1 and verify communication with the OV10635.
> - */
> - ret = max9271_enable_gpios(&dev->serializer, MAX9271_GPIO1OUT);
> - if (ret)
> - return ret;
> -
> - ret = max9271_clear_gpios(&dev->serializer, MAX9271_GPIO1OUT);
> - if (ret)
> - return ret;
> - usleep_range(10000, 15000);
The OV10635 requires the reset signal to be asserted for at least 200µs.
Is this guaranteed by the different calls we have here after asserting
reset ? Maybe a comment to explain this could be useful ?
> -
> + /* Release ov10635 from reset and initialize it. */
> ret = max9271_set_gpios(&dev->serializer, MAX9271_GPIO1OUT);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
> - usleep_range(10000, 15000);
Maybe a comment here to state that the delay has to be at least 2048
XVCLK cycles would be useful ?
With these taken into account,
Reviewed-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> + usleep_range(350, 500);
>
> for (i = 0; i < OV10635_PID_TIMEOUT; ++i) {
> ret = ov10635_read16(dev, OV10635_PID);
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
