Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-130195-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2024 16:28:59 +0000
From: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
To: git@luigi311.com
Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org, dave.stevenson@raspberrypi.com,
	jacopo.mondi@ideasonboard.com, mchehab@kernel.org, robh@kernel.org,
	krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, conor+dt@kernel.org,
	shawnguo@kernel.org, s.hauer@pengutronix.de, kernel@pengutronix.de,
	festevam@gmail.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, imx@lists.linux.dev,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	pavel@ucw.cz, phone-devel@vger.kernel.org,
	Ondrej Jirman <megous@megous.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 24/25] drivers: media: i2c: imx258: Add support for
 reset gpio
Message-ID: <Zg2Dy2QBguXQoR3P@kekkonen.localdomain>
References: <20240403150355.189229-1-git@luigi311.com>
 <20240403150355.189229-25-git@luigi311.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240403150355.189229-25-git@luigi311.com>

Hi Luis,

Could you unify the subject prefix for the driver patches, please? E.g.
"media: imx258: " would be fine.

On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 09:03:53AM -0600, git@luigi311.com wrote:
> From: Luis Garcia <git@luigi311.com>
> 
> It was documented in DT, but not implemented.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ondrej Jirman <megous@megous.com>
> Signed-off-by: Luis Garcia <git@luigi311.com>
> ---
>  drivers/media/i2c/imx258.c | 14 +++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/imx258.c b/drivers/media/i2c/imx258.c
> index 163f04f6f954..4c117c4829f1 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/imx258.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/imx258.c
> @@ -680,6 +680,7 @@ struct imx258 {
>  	unsigned int csi2_flags;
>  
>  	struct gpio_desc *powerdown_gpio;
> +	struct gpio_desc *reset_gpio;
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Mutex for serialized access:
> @@ -1232,7 +1233,11 @@ static int imx258_power_on(struct device *dev)
>  		regulator_bulk_disable(IMX258_NUM_SUPPLIES, imx258->supplies);
>  	}
>  
> -	return ret;
> +	gpiod_set_value_cansleep(imx258->reset_gpio, 0);
> +
> +	usleep_range(400, 500);

You could mention this at least in the commit message.

> +
> +	return 0;
>  }
>  
>  static int imx258_power_off(struct device *dev)
> @@ -1243,6 +1248,7 @@ static int imx258_power_off(struct device *dev)
>  	clk_disable_unprepare(imx258->clk);
>  	regulator_bulk_disable(IMX258_NUM_SUPPLIES, imx258->supplies);
>  
> +	gpiod_set_value_cansleep(imx258->reset_gpio, 1);

Same question than on the other GPIO: does this belong here?

>  	gpiod_set_value_cansleep(imx258->powerdown_gpio, 1);
>  
>  	return 0;
> @@ -1554,6 +1560,12 @@ static int imx258_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
>  	if (IS_ERR(imx258->powerdown_gpio))
>  		return PTR_ERR(imx258->powerdown_gpio);
>  
> +	/* request optional reset pin */
> +	imx258->reset_gpio = devm_gpiod_get_optional(&client->dev, "reset",
> +						    GPIOD_OUT_HIGH);
> +	if (IS_ERR(imx258->reset_gpio))
> +		return PTR_ERR(imx258->reset_gpio);
> +
>  	/* Initialize subdev */
>  	v4l2_i2c_subdev_init(&imx258->sd, client, &imx258_subdev_ops);
>  

-- 
Regards,

Sakari Ailus