On 08/09/2018 04:08 PM, Simon Horman wrote:
>> Describe the CSI2 and VIN (and their interconnections) in the R8A77980
>> device tree.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sergei Shtylyov <[email protected]>
>>
>> ---
>> This patch is against the 'renesas-devel-20180802v2-v4.18-rc7' branch of
>> Simon Horman's 'renesas.git' repo.
>>
>> The R8A77980 CSI2/VIN DT binding updates have been posted earlier today...
>>
>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77980.dtsi | 374
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 374 insertions(+)
>>
>> Index: renesas/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77980.dtsi
>> ===================================================================
>> --- renesas.orig/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77980.dtsi
>> +++ renesas/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77980.dtsi
[...]
>> @@ -769,6 +1065,84 @@
>> resets = <&cpg 603>;
>> };
>>
>> + csi40: csi2@feaa0000 {
>> + compatible = "renesas,r8a77980-csi2";
>> + reg = <0 0xfeaa0000 0 0x10000>;
>> + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 246 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>> + clocks = <&cpg CPG_MOD 716>;
>> + power-domains = <&sysc R8A77980_PD_ALWAYS_ON>;
>> + resets = <&cpg 716>;
>> + status = "disabled";
>> +
>> + ports {
>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>> + #size-cells = <0>;
>> +
>> + port@1 {
>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>> + #size-cells = <0>;
>> +
>> + reg = <1>;
>> +
>> + csi40vin0: endpoint@0 {
>> + reg = <0>;
>> + remote-endpoint = <&vin0csi40>;
>> + };
>> + csi40vin1: endpoint@1 {
>> + reg = <1>;
>> + remote-endpoint = <&vin1csi40>;
>> + };
>> + csi40vin2: endpoint@2 {
>> + reg = <2>;
>> + remote-endpoint = <&vin2csi40>;
>> + };
>> + csi40vin3: endpoint@3 {
>> + reg = <3>;
>> + remote-endpoint = <&vin3csi40>;
>> + };
>> + };
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + csi41: csi2@feab0000 {
>> + compatible = "renesas,r8a77980-csi2";
>> + reg = <0 0xfeab0000 0 0x10000>;
>> + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 246 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>
> The use of GIC_SPI 246 for both csi40 and csi41 seems suspicious.
> Is this intentional?
No, must be copy/paste artefact... Sorry about that, it should be 241
instead.
>> + clocks = <&cpg CPG_MOD 716>;
>
> Should this clock be 715 rather than 716?
Yes, sure.
I'm seeing this patch merged despite your remarks. Please either fix it up or
pull it out!
[...]
MBR, Sergei
