On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 05:28:50PM +0100, Paul Kocialkowski wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri 11 Feb 22, 22:52, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > Hi Rob, > > > > On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 09:13:30AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 07, 2022 at 05:51:21PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > > On Sat, Feb 05, 2022 at 07:54:24PM +0100, Paul Kocialkowski wrote: > > > > > This introduces YAML bindings documentation for the Allwinner A31 Image > > > > > Signal Processor (ISP). > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Paul Kocialkowski <paul.kocialkowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > --- > > > > > .../media/allwinner,sun6i-a31-isp.yaml | 117 ++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > 1 file changed, 117 insertions(+) > > > > > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/allwinner,sun6i-a31-isp.yaml > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/allwinner,sun6i-a31-isp.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/allwinner,sun6i-a31-isp.yaml > > > > > new file mode 100644 > > > > > index 000000000000..2d87022c43ce > > > > > --- /dev/null > > > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/allwinner,sun6i-a31-isp.yaml > > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,117 @@ > > > > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) > > > > > +%YAML 1.2 > > > > > +--- > > > > > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/media/allwinner,sun6i-a31-isp.yaml# > > > > > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > > > > > + > > > > > +title: Allwinner A31 Image Signal Processor Driver (ISP) Device Tree Bindings > > > > > + > > > > > +maintainers: > > > > > + - Paul Kocialkowski <paul.kocialkowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > + > > > > > +properties: > > > > > + compatible: > > > > > + enum: > > > > > + - allwinner,sun6i-a31-isp > > > > > + - allwinner,sun8i-v3s-isp > > > > > + > > > > > + reg: > > > > > + maxItems: 1 > > > > > + > > > > > + interrupts: > > > > > + maxItems: 1 > > > > > + > > > > > + clocks: > > > > > + items: > > > > > + - description: Bus Clock > > > > > + - description: Module Clock > > > > > + - description: DRAM Clock > > > > > > > > That's interesting, does the ISP have a dedicated DRAM ? > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > + clock-names: > > > > > + items: > > > > > + - const: bus > > > > > + - const: mod > > > > > + - const: ram > > > > > + > > > > > + resets: > > > > > + maxItems: 1 > > > > > + > > > > > + ports: > > > > > + $ref: /schemas/graph.yaml#/properties/ports > > > > > + > > > > > + properties: > > > > > + port@0: > > > > > + $ref: /schemas/graph.yaml#/$defs/port-base > > > > > + description: CSI0 input port > > > > > + > > > > > + properties: > > > > > + reg: > > > > > + const: 0 > > > > > + > > > > > + endpoint: > > > > > + $ref: video-interfaces.yaml# > > > > > + unevaluatedProperties: false > > > > > > > > If no other property than remote-endpoint are allowed, I'd write > > > > > > > > endpoint: > > > > $ref: video-interfaces.yaml# > > > > remote-endpoint: true > > > > > > You just mixed a node and a property... > > > > Yes, I meant > > > > endpoint: > > $ref: video-interfaces.yaml# > > properties: > > remote-endpoint: true > > > > and actually add > > > > additionalProperties: false > > > > > 'remote-endpoint' is always allowed, so need to put it here and every > > > other user. So 'unevaluatedProperties' is correct. But it would be good > > > to define what properties from video-interfaces.yaml are used here. > > > > I've been looking at this recently. The usual pattern is to write > > > > endpoint: > > $ref: video-interfaces.yaml# > > unevaluatedProperties: false > > properties: > > hsync-polarity: true > > vsync-polarity: true > > > > to express that the hsync-polarity and vsync-polarity properties are > > used. However, this will still validate fine if, for instance, > > data-lanes was specified in the device tree. Shouldn't we use > > additionalProperties instead of unevaluatedProperties here ? If so, > > specifying remote-endpoint: true seems needed. > > My understanding is that unevaluatedProperties well allow all properties > defined in the included video-interfaces.yaml ref but reject others > while additionalProperties will reject any unspecified local property, > even if it is declared in the ref. > > In any case with the ISP maybe we don't even want to take the ref from > video-interfaces.yaml since we are dealing with an internal fifo between > two devices. Maybe it would be more appropriate to ref > /schemas/graph.yaml#/$defs/endpoint-base, which already defines > remote-endpoint too. > > What do you think? Yes, if no additional property are needed, you can replace port-base with port, it will simplify the bindings. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart
