On Tue, Mar 31, 2026 at 10:02:55AM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote:

On Mon, Mar 30, 2026 at 09:27:59PM -0400, Richard Acayan wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 12:57:59PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:

quoted

Hi David, Richard,

On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 10:35:24AM +0100, David Heidelberg wrote:

quoted

On 24/03/2026 03:05, Richard Acayan wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 07:26:47PM +0100, David Heidelberg wrote:

quoted

On 17/02/2026 01:27, Richard Acayan wrote:
[...]

quoted

+&cci_i2c1 {
+	camera@1a {
+		compatible = "sony,imx355";
+		reg = <0x1a>;
+
+		clocks = <&camcc CAM_CC_MCLK2_CLK>;
+
+		assigned-clocks = <&camcc CAM_CC_MCLK2_CLK>;
+		assigned-clock-rates = <19200000>;

Extract from #sdm670-mainline:erebion.eu discussion:
The imx355 can operate on 24 MHz (on both Pixel 3 and 3a), but Linux kernel
driver can operate only with 19.2 MHz.

I assume it would be worth it mention at least by comment here.

This might set the series back because the devicetree isn't meant to be
written for specific software, but it's included in v11 because you
already asked twice.

I would say node with lower clock frequency is still much better than
nothing or placeholder saying "i2c camera here". Instead we'll have small
placeholder that value can be bumped to 24 MHz. Important is this can be
easily improved when at least one consumer of the device-tree gains support.

We have very scarce support of cameras on mobile phones in mainline, thus
leaving a comment that HW can do 24 MHz is reasonable compromise IMHO.

The bindings could document the supported frequency range.

In DTS it may make sense to set the frequency the vendor uses as it may
affect the link frequencies (albeit I guess they're the same in this
case?).

Is this review relevant to v11?

I'd think so: it doesn't mention the frequency should be 24 MHz.

Ok, please check the dts comment in v12 when I send it and continue there.