Re: [PATCH v2 01/21] dt-bindings: display: tegra: add Tegra20 VIP

[Luca Ceresoli]

Hello Rob,

Thanks for your review.

On Thu, 1 Dec 2022 17:19:36 -0600
Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 04:23:16PM +0100, Luca Ceresoli wrote:
> > VIP is the parallel video capture component within the video input
> > subsystem of Tegra20 (and other Tegra chips, apparently).
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > ---
> > 
> > Changed in v2 (suggested by Krzysztof Kozlowski):
> > - remove redundant "bindings" from subject line
> > - remove $nodename
> > - add channel@0 description
> > - add reg: const: 0
> > ---
> >  .../display/tegra/nvidia,tegra20-vip.yaml     | 63 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  MAINTAINERS                                   |  7 +++
> >  2 files changed, 70 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/tegra/nvidia,tegra20-vip.yaml
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/tegra/nvidia,tegra20-vip.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/tegra/nvidia,tegra20-vip.yaml
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..44be2e16c9b4
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/tegra/nvidia,tegra20-vip.yaml
> > @@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > +%YAML 1.2
> > +---
> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/display/tegra/nvidia,tegra20-vip.yaml#
> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > +
> > +title: NVIDIA Tegra VIP (parallel video capture) controller
> > +
> > +maintainers:
> > +  - Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > +
> > +properties:
> > +  compatible:
> > +    enum:
> > +      - nvidia,tegra20-vip
> > +
> > +  "#address-cells":
> > +    const: 1
> > +
> > +  "#size-cells":
> > +    const: 0
> > +
> > +  channel@0:  
> 
> Kind of odd there is only 1 channel with a unit-address. Are more 
> channels coming? Please make the binding as complete as possible even if 
> no driver support yet.

This was discussed in v1 with Krzysztof and the outcome was that it's
OK because it's likely that other SoCs have more, but the documentation
is not public so I cannot add examples.

Full discussion (pretty short indeed):

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/5292cc1b-c951-c5c5-b2ef-c154baf6d7fd@xxxxxxxxxx/

Do you agree that the unit-address should be kept?

> > +    description: parallel video capture interface for the VI
> > +    type: object
> > +
> > +    properties:
> > +      reg:
> > +        const: 0
> > +
> > +      ports:
> > +        $ref: /schemas/graph.yaml#/properties/ports
> > +
> > +        properties:
> > +          port@0:
> > +            $ref: /schemas/graph.yaml#/properties/port
> > +            description:
> > +              Port receiving the video stream from the sensor
> > +
> > +          port@1:
> > +            $ref: /schemas/graph.yaml#/properties/port
> > +            description:
> > +              Port sending the video stream to the VI
> > +
> > +        required:
> > +          - port@0
> > +          - port@1
> > +
> > +    additionalProperties: false  
> 
> A bit easier to read the indented cases if this is above 'properties'.

Sure, will do in v3.

-- 
Luca Ceresoli, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com