[PATCH 2/9] media: dt-bindings: add rockchip rk3588 vicap

[Conor Dooley]

On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 09:00:37PM +0100, Michael Riesch wrote:
> Hi Conor,
> 
> On 3/13/26 17:57, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 04:56:29PM +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
> >> On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 04:20:44PM +0100, Michael Riesch via B4 Relay wrote:
> >>> From: Michael Riesch <michael.riesch at collabora.com>
> >>>
> >>> Add documentation for the Rockchip RK3588 Video Capture (VICAP) unit.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Michael Riesch <michael.riesch at collabora.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>  .../bindings/media/rockchip,rk3588-vicap.yaml      | 256 +++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>  MAINTAINERS                                        |   1 +
> >>>  2 files changed, 257 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip,rk3588-vicap.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip,rk3588-vicap.yaml
> >>> new file mode 100644
> >>> index 000000000000..7fd4214921cb
> >>> --- /dev/null
> >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip,rk3588-vicap.yaml
> >>> @@ -0,0 +1,256 @@
> >>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause)
> >>> +%YAML 1.2
> >>> +---
> >>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/media/rockchip,rk3588-vicap.yaml#
> >>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> >>> +
> >>> +title: Rockchip RK3588 Video Capture (VICAP)
> >>> +
> >>> +maintainers:
> >>> +  - Michael Riesch <michael.riesch at collabora.com>
> >>> +
> >>> +description:
> >>> +  The Rockchip RK3588 Video Capture (VICAP) block features a digital video
> >>> +  port (DVP, a parallel video interface) and six MIPI CSI-2 ports. It receives
> >>> +  the data from camera sensors, video decoders, or other companion ICs and
> >>> +  transfers it into system main memory by AXI bus and/or passes it to the image
> >>> +  signal processing (ISP) blocks.
> >>> +
> >>> +properties:
> >>> +  compatible:
> >>> +    enum:
> >>> +      - rockchip,rk3588-vicap
> >>
> >> Curious why this cannot share a binding with the existing 3568-vicap.
> >> Looks pretty similar binding wise at least.
> >> If it's an entirely different architecture or whatever, please mention
> >> that in your commit message.
> > 
> > Looking further, it's using the same driver too...
> 
> It's not an entirely different architecture (indeed it uses the same
> driver). There are some differences to the RK3568 and the PX30 (which
> uses its own binding as well BTW): apart from different resets and
> clocks that's mostly the notion of the connections to the ISP. But to be
> fair, as it turns out this boils down to two additional ports.
> Other recent SoCs (e.g., RK3576 or RK3562) will be a good match for the
> RK3588 binding, but then again exactly resets, clocks and ports may vary
> in that variants as well.
> 
> Personally I find this variant-specific DT binding magic hard to read,
> and thus I went for a separate binding. That said, please let me know
> what your preference is and I'll arrange it that way. Not a hill I'd
> want to die on.


If all it really comes down to is the ports, I'd rather you added these
devices to one file, rather than having one for every related SoC.
The "magic" shouldn't be that bad if it is just ports, just some sort of
thing like

if:
  compatible:
    contains:
      const: foo
then:
  properties:
    port at 5: false

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-rockchip/attachments/20260315/7429cf13/attachment.sig>