Re: [PATCH RESEND] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8550: Add support for camss

[Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir.zapolskiy@linaro.org>]

Hi Konrad.

On 6/11/25 00:04, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 6/10/25 11:02 PM, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>> On 6/10/25 22:02, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
>>> On 10/06/2025 13:49, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> List feedback from DT people is isp@ is the correct prefix.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My bad, but I don't understand this comment, it seems irrelevant...
>>>>
>>>> The expressed concern is about the novel label name.
>>>
>>> I mean to say the feedback from Krzysztof was that we should use isp@
>>> not camss@ and I agree.
>>>
>>
>> Let me repeat it thrice, it's okay...
>>
>> I don't object against the properly selected device tree node name "isp",
>> here I object against a never used and very questionable label name "isp".
>>
>> Please feel free to ask more questions, if you still find it confusing.
>>
>> Again, I may missed a discussion about the need to get and use a novel
>> label name, then please share a link to it, it'll be very much appreciated.
> 
> To hopefully help out:
> 
> label: node-name@unit-address {
> 	property = value;
> };
> 

Thank you, here is a link to the wanted section of the dt specification
for Bryan's comprehension:

* https://github.com/devicetree-org/devicetree-specification/blob/main/source/chapter6-source-language.rst.

If for whatever reason a proposed "isp" label is preferred, then
since a label rename is not an ABI change, it would make sense to
do a massive change of renaming all camss labels. Otherwise there will
be an outstanding incorrespondence/confusion of the label names in
board .dts files, and that's bad.

--
Best wishes,
Vladimir