Improve the ov5640 video driver to provide parallel interface (DVP) support.

[CharlesDias]

Is your enhancement proposal related to a problem? Please describe.
The current ov5640 does not support the parallel interface, it supports MIPI CSI-2 interface.

Describe the solution you'd like
Improve the ov5640 video driver to provide parallel interface support as well.

Additional context
Anyone planning on implementing this improvement?

Recently, the OV5640 video driver was added. However, it only supports the MIPI CSI-2 interface. I plan to implement this driver update, if no one is implementing it, and validate it on a STMicroelectronics board via DCMI driver.

• update the ov5640 driver (#76124).
• add support for ST B-CAMS-OMV-MB1683 shield (#76143)
• implement a sample code to run on STM32 board.

/cc @ngphibang @kartben @erwango @ABOSTM @FRASTM @josuah @loicpoulain @danieldegrasse

[josuah]

I have worked a bit with that sensor in the past in parallel (non-MIPI) mode, so could give a hand.
Available in the chat.

This might be the first sensor that would be possible to configure in either modes.

There is a source = <&phandle>; devicetree property that would allow the controller to configure the sensor into the correct mode, maybe that is the way.

On Linux, the MIPI parameters are passed as part of the endpoint:

ports {
        port {
                endpoint {
                        mipi-lanes = <1 2 3 4>;
                        remote-endpoint = <&other>;
                };
        }
};

That opens these possibilities:

• Encode the selection of the mode in the devicetree
• Encode a phandle in the devicetree and have the controller call control commands to select the DVP or MIPI configuration for the sensor.

[CharlesDias]

Thanks for your availability, @josuah! I am not a specialist, but could be a good opportunity to learn more about camera sensor and Zephyr drivers as well.

[CharlesDias]

This was the partial DTS that I'm using in the initial tests with OV5640 sensor and ST DCMI driver on STM32H7B3I-DK board.

&i2c4 {
	pinctrl-0 = <&i2c4_scl_pd12 &i2c4_sda_pd13>;
	pinctrl-names = "default";
	status = "okay";
	clock-frequency = <I2C_BITRATE_FAST>;

	ov5640: ov5640@3c {
		compatible = "ovti,ov5640";
		reg = <0x3c>;
		status = "okay";
		reset-gpios = <&gpioa 0 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
		powerdown-gpios = <&gpioa 7 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;

		port {
			ov5640_ep_out: endpoint {
				remote-endpoint = <&dcmi_ep_in>;
			};
		};
	};
};

&dcmi {

	status = "okay";
	sensor = <&ov5640>;
	pinctrl-0 = <&dcmi_hsync_pa4 &dcmi_pixclk_pa6 &dcmi_vsync_pb7
		&dcmi_d0_pc6 &dcmi_d1_pc7 &dcmi_d2_pg10 &dcmi_d3_pc9
		&dcmi_d4_pc11 &dcmi_d5_pd3 &dcmi_d6_pb8 &dcmi_d7_pb9>;
	pinctrl-names = "default";
	bus-width = <8>;
	hsync-active = <0>;
	vsync-active = <0>;
	pixelclk-active = <1>;
	capture-rate = <1>;
	dmas = <&dma1 0 75 (STM32_DMA_PERIPH_TO_MEMORY | STM32_DMA_PERIPH_NO_INC |
		STM32_DMA_MEM_INC | STM32_DMA_PERIPH_8BITS | STM32_DMA_MEM_32BITS |
		STM32_DMA_PRIORITY_HIGH) STM32_DMA_FIFO_1_4>;

	port {
		dcmi_ep_in: endpoint {
			remote-endpoint = <&ov5640_ep_out>;
		};
	};
};

document_5147857391924020551.mp4

[CharlesDias]

@josuah, if I got your suggestion, the previous DTS should be updated to something like below? I'm using the interface-typeproperty to specify the interface.

Parallel interface is used.

&i2c4 {
	pinctrl-0 = <&i2c4_scl_pd12 &i2c4_sda_pd13>;
	pinctrl-names = "default";
	status = "okay";
	clock-frequency = <I2C_BITRATE_FAST>;

	ov5640: ov5640@3c {
		compatible = "ovti,ov5640";
		reg = <0x3c>;
		status = "okay";
	      
		reset-gpios = <&gpioa 0 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
		powerdown-gpios = <&gpioa 7 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
		
	        interface-type = "dvp";
		port {
		    dvp_ep_out: endpoint {
			bus-width = <8>;
			hsync-active = <0>;
			vsync-active = <0>;
			pixelclk-active = <1>;
		        remote-endpoint = <&dcmi_ep_in>;
		    };
		};
	};
};

&dcmi {

	status = "okay";
	sensor = <&ov5640>;
	pinctrl-0 = <&dcmi_hsync_pa4 &dcmi_pixclk_pa6 &dcmi_vsync_pb7
		&dcmi_d0_pc6 &dcmi_d1_pc7 &dcmi_d2_pg10 &dcmi_d3_pc9
		&dcmi_d4_pc11 &dcmi_d5_pd3 &dcmi_d6_pb8 &dcmi_d7_pb9>;
	pinctrl-names = "default";
	capture-rate = <1>;
	dmas = <&dma1 0 75 (STM32_DMA_PERIPH_TO_MEMORY | STM32_DMA_PERIPH_NO_INC |
		STM32_DMA_MEM_INC | STM32_DMA_PERIPH_8BITS | STM32_DMA_MEM_32BITS |
		STM32_DMA_PRIORITY_HIGH) STM32_DMA_FIFO_1_4>;

	port {
		dcmi_ep_in: endpoint {
			remote-endpoint = <&dvp_ep_out>;
		};
	};
};

Parallel interface is used.

&i2c4 {
	pinctrl-0 = <&i2c4_scl_pd12 &i2c4_sda_pd13>;
	pinctrl-names = "default";
	status = "okay";
	clock-frequency = <I2C_BITRATE_FAST>;

	ov5640: ov5640@3c {
		compatible = "ovti,ov5640";
		reg = <0x3c>;
		status = "okay";
	       
		reset-gpios = <&gpioa 0 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
		powerdown-gpios = <&gpioa 7 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
		
	        interface-type = "mipi";
		port {
		    mipi_ep_out: endpoint {
		        data-lanes = <1 2>;
		        clock-lanes = <0>;
		        bus-width = <2>;
		        remote-endpoint = <&mipi_csi_ep_in>;
		    };
		};
	};
};

&mipi_csi {
    status = "okay";

    /* Add other configs. /*
    
    port {
        mipi_csi_ep_in: endpoint {
            remote-endpoint = <&mipi_ep_out>;
        };
    };
};

[josuah]

That would be something like this in Linux (with the mipi-lanes data-lanes (I misremembered) on the mipi_csi controller block I think), but currently, there is no semantics given in Zephyr for the remote-endpoint. Configuring it is pure documentation and not used in the driver.

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/arm/boot/dts/st/stm32mp15xx-dhcor-avenger96.dtsi#n156

&dcmi {
        pinctrl-names = "default", "sleep";
        pinctrl-0 = <&dcmi_pins_c>;
        pinctrl-1 = <&dcmi_sleep_pins_c>;
        status = "disabled";

        port {
                dcmi_0: endpoint {
                        remote-endpoint = <&stmipi_2>;
                        bus-type = <5>;
                        bus-width = <8>;
                        pclk-sample = <0>;
                };
        };
};

And another example when MIPI is used:

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6q-h100.dts#n337

&mipi_csi {
        status = "okay";

        port {
                mipi_csi2_in: endpoint {
                        remote-endpoint = <&tc358743_out>;
                        data-lanes = <1 2 3 4>;
                        clock-lanes = <0>;
                        clock-noncontinuous;
                        link-frequencies = /bits/ 64 <297000000>;
                };
        };
};

Although Zephyr does not have any of these, and configuring them here might not be necessary to get them to work.

Even having any remote-endpoint declared at all is just symbolic currently.

[CharlesDias]

Thanks, @josuah ! I'll take a better look at those links.

[josuah]

In Linux, the sensor detects whether it is configured on a MIPI bus or on a DVP/DMCI bus:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/media/i2c/ov5640.c#n2712

This means a OV5640 camera devicetree node would be nested into either a MIPI or DMCI node/block, and this would sets which type it is configured with.

I think there lack a devicetree bindings declaration on-bus: mipi; which would allow to introduce that difference in type.

But of course, MIPI devices aare "on-bus" for their configuration interface: I2C, not MIPI or CSI!

This is the "on-bus" for their remote-endpopint that is considered here: sensor->ep.bus_type

This means we would probably need something like this to be merged first: #73023

Maybe a simple devicetree configuration could be done in the meantime? So that you are not blocked by this.
Some bus-type = with a comment mentioning #73023, at least to allow other members to give their feedback on this.

[ngphibang]

+1 from me. I think this would be a nice extension for ov5640. FYI, we are currently adding framerate changing to this driver but this shouldn't be a problem.

I think there lack a devicetree bindings declaration on-bus: mipi; which would allow to introduce that difference in type.

But of course, MIPI devices aare "on-bus" for their configuration interface: I2C, not MIPI or CSI!

This is the "on-bus" for their remote-endpopint that is considered here: sensor->ep.bus_type

This means we would probably need something like this to be merged first: #73023

@josuah , @CharlesDias : For this CSI / DVP (parallel) extension, as you said, we just need a "bus-type" property defined in the devicetree. We should group all these common properties into a "video-interfaces.yaml" binding (to avoid repeating them for each driver), some thing like this which I picked from Linux. Then, in the driver, we can get the property by : DT_PROP(DT_INST_CHILD(DT_INST_CHILD(id, port), endpoint), bus_type).

This will be similar to what actually done for display, as here.

Support of remote-endpoint in Zephyr would be nicer but I think it is not a blocking point for this case.

[josuah]

some thing like #74415 which I picked from Linux

Exciting! This is some good way to structure the various video drivers.

Then, in the driver, we can get the property by : DT_PROP(DT_INST_CHILD(DT_INST_CHILD(id, port), endpoint), bus_type).

I agree and this is good to have it this way in the meantime.

@CharlesDias would a bus-type property on the devicetree work for you?

Something like this:

&i2c4 {
		port {
			mipi_ep_out: endpoint {
				bus-type = <...>;
			};
		};
	};
};

[CharlesDias]

@CharlesDias would a bus-type property on the devicetree work for you?

@josuah, I think so!

Thank you, @josuah and @ngphibang! I'll wait a little more for other members' to confirm that no one is working on this.

[CharlesDias]

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/arm/boot/dts/st/stm32mp15xx-dhcor-avenger96.dtsi#n156

Hi, @josuah and @ngphibang. I hope you can help me with the following question. On the Linux driver, from the link above, we have duplicate properties declared for both endpoints, dcmi and i2c. I thought this duplication strange. My questions are:

1. Will we do this duplication on Zephyr?
2. On Linux, the bus-type is defined into DCMI endpoint instead of OV5640 endpoint, but I believe for Zephyr it doesn't make sense. So, will we add the bus-type in the OV5640 endpoint, right?

Thanks!

&i2c4 {
	stmipi: stmipi@14 {
                . . . 
		ports {
                 . . .
			port@2 {
				reg = <2>;
				stmipi_2: endpoint {
					bus-width = <8>;
					hsync-active = <0>;
					vsync-active = <0>;
					pclk-sample = <0>;
					remote-endpoint = <&dcmi_0>;
				};
			};
		};
	};

&dcmi {
        . . . 

	port {
		dcmi_0: endpoint {
			remote-endpoint = <&stmipi_2>;
			bus-type = <5>;
			bus-width = <8>;
			pclk-sample = <0>;
		};
	};
};

[ngphibang]

@CharlesDias

• Firstly, I think this is not a full description of the ov5640 camera node, as you can see, it lacks some things like reset-gpios, pwdn-gpios, etc. These things will be completed by a camera overlay dts where you may find the bus-type property. Unlike Zephyr, overlay devicetrees are not integrated into Linux so you will not see them in upstream.
• Secondly, the present of bus-width already indicated that this is a parallel interface as pointed out here and even without bus-type property in the devicetree, the parsing function can guess the actual bus-type from this property.
• Thirdly, what we should base on is the ov5640 driver, you can see here and here , it really parses the endpoint of the ov5640 to get the bus-type.
• Then, as a reference, you can see here where bus-type is declared for ov5640 node.
• Finally, there is a low possibility that we don't need to define bus-type in the sensor node but we get it from the dcmi via remote-endpoint. But, remote-endpoint is currently not supported in Zephyr.

So, in any of above cases, I think we should define bus-type in ov5640 node.