Hi Ricardo,
On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 10:48:34AM +0100, Ricardo Ribalda wrote:
> Hi Sakari
>
> On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 at 10:13, Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ricardo,
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 09:51:34AM +0100, Ricardo Ribalda wrote:
> > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-device.yaml
> > > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-device.yaml
> > > > > index da890ee60ce6..5322772a4470 100644
> > > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-device.yaml
> > > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-device.yaml
> > > > > @@ -37,6 +37,10 @@ properties:
> > > > > but a device adhering to this binding may leave out all except
> > > > > for "usbVID,PID".
> > > > >
> > > > > + orientation:
> > > > > + description: If present, specifies the orientation of the usb device.
> > > > > + $ref: /schemas/media/video-interface-devices.yaml#/properties/orientation
> > > >
> > > > Do you need this for a camera or for other kinds of USB devices, too?
> > > >
> > > > What about e.g. the rotation property?
> > >
> > > I need it for cameras. I do not have a usecase for rotation now, but I
> > > might have in the future.
> >
> > If it's specific for cameras (UVC kind I presume?), wouldn't it be
> > reasonable to add specific bindings for it?
> Yes, they are uvc cameras
>
> Do you mean something like this:
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-device.yaml
> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-device.yaml
> index da890ee60ce6..bc80c1e7360f 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-device.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-device.yaml
> @@ -75,6 +75,12 @@ patternProperties:
> configuration value.
> maxItems: 1
>
> + image-sensor:
> + description: Video interface properties associated to USB cameras,
> + typically UVC compliant.
> + allOf:
> + - $ref: /schemas/media/video-interface-devices.yaml#
> +
I missed earlier the compatible string comes directly from the USB vendor
and product IDs and this isn't the primary means of identifying a USB
device anyway, IOW we couldn't have a compatible for UVC webcams for
instance.
None of the alternatives here seem exactly great to me but all of them
would likely just work.
I think I prefer your earlier suggestion, the question I have though is
whether or not it should be limited to certain VIDs/PIDs.
> required:
> - reg
>
> @@ -113,6 +119,9 @@ examples:
> interface@0 {
> compatible = "usbif123,abcd.config1.0";
> reg = <0 1>;
> + image-sensor {
> + orientation: 0;
> + };
> };
>
> interface@0,2 {
--
Kind regards,
Sakari Ailus
