Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] Documentation: of: Document graph bindings

2014-03-11 Thread Sylwester Nawrocki
On 10/03/14 07:53, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 08/03/14 14:25, Grant Likely wrote: > >> Sure. If endpoints are logical, then only create the ones actually >> hooked up. No problem there. But nor do I see any issue with having >> empty connections if the board author things it makes sense to have th

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] Documentation: of: Document graph bindings

2014-03-09 Thread Tomi Valkeinen
On 08/03/14 14:25, Grant Likely wrote: > Sure. If endpoints are logical, then only create the ones actually > hooked up. No problem there. But nor do I see any issue with having > empty connections if the board author things it makes sense to have them > in the dtsi. I don't think they are usuall

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] Documentation: of: Document graph bindings

2014-03-08 Thread Laurent Pinchart
Hi Grant, On Saturday 08 March 2014 12:25:32 Grant Likely wrote: > On Sat, 8 Mar 2014 11:35:38 +0200, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > > On 07/03/14 20:11, Grant Likely wrote: > > >>> Any board not using that port can just leave the endpoint > > >>> disconnected. > > >> > > >> Hmm I see. I'm against that.

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] Documentation: of: Document graph bindings

2014-03-08 Thread Grant Likely
On Sat, 8 Mar 2014 11:35:38 +0200, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 07/03/14 20:11, Grant Likely wrote: > > >>> Any board not using that port can just leave the endpoint disconnected. > >> > >> Hmm I see. I'm against that. > >> > >> I think the SoC dtsi should not contain endpoint node, or even port no

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] Documentation: of: Document graph bindings

2014-03-08 Thread Tomi Valkeinen
On 07/03/14 20:11, Grant Likely wrote: >>> Any board not using that port can just leave the endpoint disconnected. >> >> Hmm I see. I'm against that. >> >> I think the SoC dtsi should not contain endpoint node, or even port node >> (at least usually). It doesn't know how many endpoints, if any, a

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] Documentation: of: Document graph bindings

2014-03-07 Thread Grant Likely
On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 16:50:52 +0200, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 26/02/14 16:57, Philipp Zabel wrote: > > Hi Tomi, > > > > Am Mittwoch, den 26.02.2014, 15:14 +0200 schrieb Tomi Valkeinen: > >> On 25/02/14 16:58, Philipp Zabel wrote: > >> > >>> +Optional endpoint properties > >>> +-

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] Documentation: of: Document graph bindings

2014-03-07 Thread Grant Likely
On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 15:14:17 +0200, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 25/02/14 16:58, Philipp Zabel wrote: > > > +Optional endpoint properties > > + > > + > > +- remote-endpoint: phandle to an 'endpoint' subnode of a remote device > > node. > > Why is that optional? What u

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] Documentation: of: Document graph bindings

2014-02-27 Thread Tomi Valkeinen
On 27/02/14 12:52, Philipp Zabel wrote: > This is a bit verbose, and if your output port is on an encoder device > with multiple inputs, the correct port number would become a bit > unintuitive. For example, we'd have to use port@4 as the output encoder > units that have a 4-port input multiplexer

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] Documentation: of: Document graph bindings

2014-02-27 Thread Philipp Zabel
Hi Tomi, Am Donnerstag, den 27.02.2014, 10:08 +0200 schrieb Tomi Valkeinen: > On 26/02/14 17:47, Philipp Zabel wrote: > > Please let's not make it mandatory for a port node to contain an > > endpoint. For any device with multiple ports we can't use the simplified > > form above, and only adding th

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] Documentation: of: Document graph bindings

2014-02-27 Thread Tomi Valkeinen
On 26/02/14 17:47, Philipp Zabel wrote: > Ok, that looks compact enough. I still don't see the need to change make > the remote-endpoint property required to achieve this, though. On the > other hand, I wouldn't object to making it mandatory either. Sure, having remote-endpoint as required doesn'

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] Documentation: of: Document graph bindings

2014-02-26 Thread Philipp Zabel
Am Mittwoch, den 26.02.2014, 16:50 +0200 schrieb Tomi Valkeinen: > On 26/02/14 16:57, Philipp Zabel wrote: > > Hi Tomi, > > > > Am Mittwoch, den 26.02.2014, 15:14 +0200 schrieb Tomi Valkeinen: > >> On 25/02/14 16:58, Philipp Zabel wrote: > >> > >>> +Optional endpoint properties > >>> +

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] Documentation: of: Document graph bindings

2014-02-26 Thread Tomi Valkeinen
On 26/02/14 16:57, Philipp Zabel wrote: > Hi Tomi, > > Am Mittwoch, den 26.02.2014, 15:14 +0200 schrieb Tomi Valkeinen: >> On 25/02/14 16:58, Philipp Zabel wrote: >> >>> +Optional endpoint properties >>> + >>> + >>> +- remote-endpoint: phandle to an 'endpoint' subnode o

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] Documentation: of: Document graph bindings

2014-02-26 Thread Philipp Zabel
Hi Tomi, Am Mittwoch, den 26.02.2014, 15:14 +0200 schrieb Tomi Valkeinen: > On 25/02/14 16:58, Philipp Zabel wrote: > > > +Optional endpoint properties > > + > > + > > +- remote-endpoint: phandle to an 'endpoint' subnode of a remote device > > node. > > Why is that o

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] Documentation: of: Document graph bindings

2014-02-26 Thread Tomi Valkeinen
On 25/02/14 16:58, Philipp Zabel wrote: > +Optional endpoint properties > + > + > +- remote-endpoint: phandle to an 'endpoint' subnode of a remote device node. Why is that optional? What use is an endpoint, if it's not connected to something? Also, if this is being wo

[PATCH v4 3/3] Documentation: of: Document graph bindings

2014-02-25 Thread Philipp Zabel
The device tree graph bindings as used by V4L2 and documented in Documentation/device-tree/bindings/media/video-interfaces.txt contain generic parts that are not media specific but could be useful for any subsystem with data flow between multiple devices. This document describe the generic bindings