• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 5 replies
  • Answers 3 answers
  • Subscribers 33 subscribers
  • Views 790 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Similar topics

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

Original question:

DS90UB954-Q1: DS90UB954 register clarification

DS90UB954-Q1: DS90UB954 register clarification

user5273320
Prodigy 30 points
Part Number: DS90UB954-Q1

Hello TI team,

        This is Roger from Roseek China. We are working on camera with DS90UB954/953. The image sensor is SONY IMX290. We have problem with bring up DS90UB954/953. The test pattern image is OK, while we could not output image of IMX290. I have checked the output of IMX290, MIPI seems OK. I thought we might be have similar issue as  once asked issue about DS90UB954 and IMX290. Anyhow, i don't find any useful information on how to fix this problem. Could you help to provide some brilliant idea on how to solve this problem? Thanks.

BRs

Roger Wu

  • 0
    TI__Expert 4555 points

    Hi Roger,

    Could you explain how you initialized the sensors? Generally what we find is that some people omit setting up the Serializer ID, Alias ID, Slave ID, and Slave Alias ID.

    Training on FPD-Link Serializer Deserializer devices and system: https://training.ti.com/fpd-link-learning-center

    More information on IVI or ADAS FPD-Link products: http://www.ti.com/interface/fpd-link-serdes/overview.html

    Best Regards,

    Jonny

  • 0 in reply to Jonathan Nguyen
    Prodigy 30 points
    Hi Jonny,
    Thanks for your kindly reply. I first thought that maybe some special setting of 953/4 is needed for bringing up SONY IMX290. That's why I raise the question. Today, we have fix the problem. It turns out that our setting of IMX290 has some problem. And the image is OK now.

    BRs
    Roger Wu
  • 0 in reply to user5273320
    TI__Mastermind 30515 points
    Roger,
    we can't understand your question. Here we just highlight UB953/UB954 has no any special setting request to bring up IMX290. to bring up the total system based on imx290, UB953, UB954, processor and display panel, I think you should analyze the total system including:
    1. what is the I/f design between IMX290 and UB953: UB953 is one I/f to get video data from IMX290, it also can control the IMX290 in case of your application, such as clk_out, RESET or POWER DOWN the IMX290 with UB953's GPIO, it is dependent on your design! UB953 provides control signal based on reg. setting in case of your need.
    2. UB953 and UB954 link: can work with strap pin setting automatically, also can refer to TI's app. note on how to bring up UB953/UB954
    3. what is the I/f design between UB954 and processor: are they matched?
    4. UB53 and UB954 provide rich function for this link debug! such as pattern gen. inside UB953 and UB954, link error diagnostic, video format record etc, which are included in UB954's d/s (also reg. setting is referred in d/s). you can isolate the problematic section for this total system.
    5. TI provides refer design in my.ti.com on UB953 camera design with IMX290 for your reference.
    6. www.ti.com/fpd-link, provides on-line video training on FPD-Link, also on-line video training on how to bringup and debug UB953/UB954 system.
    7. last, pleas note UB953/UB954 is one pair of SerDes, it transmits the input video with CSI2 from the sensor and output the video with CSI2 port to processor, and provides one physical channel. it doesn't change any input video format.

    regards,
    Steven
  • 0 in reply to Steven(Shenzhen) Shi
    Prodigy 30 points
    Hi Steven,
    As i reply before this morning, issue had been fixed. It's caused by IMX290 setting.

    BRs
    Roger Wu
  • 0 in reply to user5273320
    TI__Mastermind 30515 points
    This is what I expected. I sent the note in this thread just provide one" general system-level trouble-shooting" method, it is not only one chip-level issue..

    best regards,
    Steven