Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 2 Nov 2020 11:33:40 +0100
From:   Paul Kocialkowski <contact@paulk.fr>
To:     Maxime Ripard <maxime@cerno.tech>
Cc:     devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org>,
        Matteo Scordino <matteo.scordino@gmail.com>,
        Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@aosc.io>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] dt-bindings: arm: sunxi: Add SL631 with IMX179
 bindings
Message-ID: <20201102103340.GD11809@aptenodytes>
References: <20201031182137.1879521-1-contact@paulk.fr>
 <20201031182137.1879521-9-contact@paulk.fr>
 <20201102101333.4bm2lfqpqnbpyp63@gilmour.lan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20201102101333.4bm2lfqpqnbpyp63@gilmour.lan>
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On Mon 02 Nov 20, 11:13, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 07:21:36PM +0100, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > Document the compatible strings for the SL631 Action Camera with IMX179.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Paul Kocialkowski <contact@paulk.fr>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/sunxi.yaml | 6 ++++++
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/sunxi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/sunxi.yaml
> > index afa00268c7db..0fa0c0b5d89f 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/sunxi.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/sunxi.yaml
> > @@ -754,6 +754,12 @@ properties:
> >            - const: sinlinx,sina33
> >            - const: allwinner,sun8i-a33
> >  
> > +      - description: SL631 Action Camera with IMX179
> > +        items:
> > +          - const: unknown,sl631-imx179
> > +          - const: unknown,sl631
> > +          - const: allwinner,sun8i-v3
> > +
> 
> unknown is not a valid vendor (and you should explain why you picked
> that vendor name in the first place).

Ah right, it's not in the vendor prefixes. The rationale is that there is no
indication of what the vendor might be on the PCB. Should I maybe use
allwinner here? It looks derived from a V3 reference design anyway
(at least the pin assignment matches e.g. Sochip's S3 EVB and other known S3
boards too apparently) so this could make sense.

Cheers,

Paul

-- 
Developer of free digital technology and hardware support.

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/