* [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung, exynos4212-jpeg
@ 2016-07-14 20:01 ` Shuah Khan
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Shuah Khan @ 2016-07-14 20:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Add add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg codec,
reorder entries to improve readability and make it easier to add
new entries.
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <shuahkh@osg.samsung.com>
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
index 38941db..093614c 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
@@ -3,9 +3,9 @@ Samsung S5P/EXYNOS SoC series JPEG codec
Required properties:
- compatible : should be one of:
- "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg",
- "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
- "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
+ "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
+ "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg",
+ "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
- reg : address and length of the JPEG codec IP register set;
- interrupts : specifies the JPEG codec IP interrupt;
- clock-names : should contain:
--
2.7.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
2016-07-14 20:01 ` [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung, exynos4212-jpeg Shuah Khan
@ 2016-07-15 6:25 ` Jacek Anaszewski
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Jacek Anaszewski @ 2016-07-15 6:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Shuah Khan
Cc: robh+dt, pawel.moll, mark.rutland, ijc+devicetree, galak, kgene,
k.kozlowski, mchehab, andrzej.p, hans.verkuil, javier,
devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel
Hi Shuah,
On 07/14/2016 10:01 PM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> Add add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg codec,
> reorder entries to improve readability and make it easier to add
> new entries.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <shuahkh@osg.samsung.com>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
> index 38941db..093614c 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
> @@ -3,9 +3,9 @@ Samsung S5P/EXYNOS SoC series JPEG codec
> Required properties:
>
> - compatible : should be one of:
> - "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg",
> - "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
> - "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
> + "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
> + "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg",
> + "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
> - reg : address and length of the JPEG codec IP register set;
> - interrupts : specifies the JPEG codec IP interrupt;
> - clock-names : should contain:
>
Acked-by: Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@samsung.com>
--
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
@ 2016-07-15 6:25 ` Jacek Anaszewski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Jacek Anaszewski @ 2016-07-15 6:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Hi Shuah,
On 07/14/2016 10:01 PM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> Add add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg codec,
> reorder entries to improve readability and make it easier to add
> new entries.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <shuahkh@osg.samsung.com>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
> index 38941db..093614c 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
> @@ -3,9 +3,9 @@ Samsung S5P/EXYNOS SoC series JPEG codec
> Required properties:
>
> - compatible : should be one of:
> - "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg",
> - "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
> - "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
> + "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
> + "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg",
> + "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
> - reg : address and length of the JPEG codec IP register set;
> - interrupts : specifies the JPEG codec IP interrupt;
> - clock-names : should contain:
>
Acked-by: Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@samsung.com>
--
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
2016-07-14 20:01 ` [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung, exynos4212-jpeg Shuah Khan
@ 2016-07-15 7:28 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-07-15 7:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Shuah Khan, robh+dt, pawel.moll, mark.rutland, ijc+devicetree,
galak, kgene, mchehab, andrzej.p, j.anaszewski, hans.verkuil
Cc: javier, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel
On 07/14/2016 10:01 PM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> Add add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg codec,
> reorder entries to improve readability and make it easier to add
> new entries.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <shuahkh@osg.samsung.com>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
> index 38941db..093614c 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
> @@ -3,9 +3,9 @@ Samsung S5P/EXYNOS SoC series JPEG codec
> Required properties:
>
> - compatible : should be one of:
> - "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg",
> - "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
> - "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
> + "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
> + "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg",
> + "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
I am not convinced that this is needed because exynos4212-jpeg is equal
to exynos4210-jpeg... It is a little bit weird because Jacek's commit
3246fdaa0ac2d9 ("[media] s5p-jpeg: Add support for Exynos3250 SoC")
changed the driver data for Exynos4210 from S5P to Exynos4 without
explaining it... However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second can be
still documented e.g. as deprecated.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
@ 2016-07-15 7:28 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-07-15 7:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 07/14/2016 10:01 PM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> Add add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg codec,
> reorder entries to improve readability and make it easier to add
> new entries.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <shuahkh@osg.samsung.com>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
> index 38941db..093614c 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
> @@ -3,9 +3,9 @@ Samsung S5P/EXYNOS SoC series JPEG codec
> Required properties:
>
> - compatible : should be one of:
> - "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg",
> - "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
> - "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
> + "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
> + "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg",
> + "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
I am not convinced that this is needed because exynos4212-jpeg is equal
to exynos4210-jpeg... It is a little bit weird because Jacek's commit
3246fdaa0ac2d9 ("[media] s5p-jpeg: Add support for Exynos3250 SoC")
changed the driver data for Exynos4210 from S5P to Exynos4 without
explaining it... However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second can be
still documented e.g. as deprecated.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
2016-07-15 7:28 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
@ 2016-07-15 8:14 ` Jacek Anaszewski
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Jacek Anaszewski @ 2016-07-15 8:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski
Cc: Shuah Khan, robh+dt, pawel.moll, mark.rutland, ijc+devicetree,
galak, kgene, mchehab, andrzej.p, hans.verkuil, javier,
devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel
Hi Krzysztof,
On 07/15/2016 09:28 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 07/14/2016 10:01 PM, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> Add add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg codec,
>> reorder entries to improve readability and make it easier to add
>> new entries.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <shuahkh@osg.samsung.com>
>> ---
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt | 6 +++---
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
>> index 38941db..093614c 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
>> @@ -3,9 +3,9 @@ Samsung S5P/EXYNOS SoC series JPEG codec
>> Required properties:
>>
>> - compatible : should be one of:
>> - "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg",
>> - "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
>> - "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
>> + "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
>> + "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg",
>> + "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
>
> I am not convinced that this is needed because exynos4212-jpeg is equal
> to exynos4210-jpeg... It is a little bit weird because Jacek's commit
> 3246fdaa0ac2d9 ("[media] s5p-jpeg: Add support for Exynos3250 SoC")
> changed the driver data for Exynos4210 from S5P to Exynos4 without
> explaining it...
It was probably a bug fix since 4210 and 4212 have the same
JPEG IP. I agree that it isn't best practice to smuggle bug
fixes like that.
> However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
> only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second can be
> still documented e.g. as deprecated.
Still, both of them are present in the driver. Shouldn't it be reflected
in the documentation?
--
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
@ 2016-07-15 8:14 ` Jacek Anaszewski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Jacek Anaszewski @ 2016-07-15 8:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Hi Krzysztof,
On 07/15/2016 09:28 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 07/14/2016 10:01 PM, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> Add add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg codec,
>> reorder entries to improve readability and make it easier to add
>> new entries.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <shuahkh@osg.samsung.com>
>> ---
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt | 6 +++---
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
>> index 38941db..093614c 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/exynos-jpeg-codec.txt
>> @@ -3,9 +3,9 @@ Samsung S5P/EXYNOS SoC series JPEG codec
>> Required properties:
>>
>> - compatible : should be one of:
>> - "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg",
>> - "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
>> - "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
>> + "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
>> + "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg",
>> + "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
>
> I am not convinced that this is needed because exynos4212-jpeg is equal
> to exynos4210-jpeg... It is a little bit weird because Jacek's commit
> 3246fdaa0ac2d9 ("[media] s5p-jpeg: Add support for Exynos3250 SoC")
> changed the driver data for Exynos4210 from S5P to Exynos4 without
> explaining it...
It was probably a bug fix since 4210 and 4212 have the same
JPEG IP. I agree that it isn't best practice to smuggle bug
fixes like that.
> However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
> only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second can be
> still documented e.g. as deprecated.
Still, both of them are present in the driver. Shouldn't it be reflected
in the documentation?
--
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
2016-07-15 8:14 ` Jacek Anaszewski
@ 2016-07-15 8:17 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-07-15 8:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jacek Anaszewski
Cc: Shuah Khan, robh+dt, pawel.moll, mark.rutland, ijc+devicetree,
galak, kgene, mchehab, andrzej.p, hans.verkuil, javier,
devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel
On 07/15/2016 10:14 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>> However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
>> only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second can be
>> still documented e.g. as deprecated.
>
> Still, both of them are present in the driver. Shouldn't it be reflected
> in the documentation?
Right, it is a good practice, so how about:
- compatible : should be one of:
"samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
"samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
"samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
Deprecated: "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg"
(or any other formatting)
plus update to DTS changing it to 4210?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
@ 2016-07-15 8:17 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-07-15 8:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 07/15/2016 10:14 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>> However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
>> only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second can be
>> still documented e.g. as deprecated.
>
> Still, both of them are present in the driver. Shouldn't it be reflected
> in the documentation?
Right, it is a good practice, so how about:
- compatible : should be one of:
"samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
"samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
"samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
Deprecated: "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg"
(or any other formatting)
plus update to DTS changing it to 4210?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
2016-07-15 8:17 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
@ 2016-07-15 8:28 ` Jacek Anaszewski
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Jacek Anaszewski @ 2016-07-15 8:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski
Cc: Shuah Khan, robh+dt, pawel.moll, mark.rutland, ijc+devicetree,
galak, kgene, mchehab, andrzej.p, hans.verkuil, javier,
devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel
On 07/15/2016 10:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 07/15/2016 10:14 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>> However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
>>> only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second can be
>>> still documented e.g. as deprecated.
>>
>> Still, both of them are present in the driver. Shouldn't it be reflected
>> in the documentation?
>
> Right, it is a good practice, so how about:
>
> - compatible : should be one of:
> "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
> "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
> "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
>
> Deprecated: "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg"
>
> (or any other formatting)
> plus update to DTS changing it to 4210?
Why newer 4212 version should be made deprecated?
--
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
@ 2016-07-15 8:28 ` Jacek Anaszewski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Jacek Anaszewski @ 2016-07-15 8:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 07/15/2016 10:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 07/15/2016 10:14 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>> However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
>>> only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second can be
>>> still documented e.g. as deprecated.
>>
>> Still, both of them are present in the driver. Shouldn't it be reflected
>> in the documentation?
>
> Right, it is a good practice, so how about:
>
> - compatible : should be one of:
> "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
> "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
> "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
>
> Deprecated: "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg"
>
> (or any other formatting)
> plus update to DTS changing it to 4210?
Why newer 4212 version should be made deprecated?
--
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
2016-07-15 8:28 ` Jacek Anaszewski
@ 2016-07-15 8:33 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-07-15 8:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jacek Anaszewski
Cc: Shuah Khan, robh+dt, pawel.moll, mark.rutland, ijc+devicetree,
galak, kgene, mchehab, andrzej.p, hans.verkuil, javier,
devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel
On 07/15/2016 10:28 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
> On 07/15/2016 10:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 07/15/2016 10:14 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>>> However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
>>>> only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second can be
>>>> still documented e.g. as deprecated.
>>>
>>> Still, both of them are present in the driver. Shouldn't it be reflected
>>> in the documentation?
>>
>> Right, it is a good practice, so how about:
>>
>> - compatible : should be one of:
>> "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
>> "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
>> "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
>>
>> Deprecated: "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg"
>>
>> (or any other formatting)
>> plus update to DTS changing it to 4210?
>
> Why newer 4212 version should be made deprecated?
I don't mind the other way. However it seems logical to me that newer
chip is compatible with existing one so the existing one (older) is
used. When adding support for new devices, for most of re-usable drivers
we use old compatibles. But as I said, it doesn't really matter to me.
BR,
Krzysztof
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
@ 2016-07-15 8:33 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-07-15 8:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 07/15/2016 10:28 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
> On 07/15/2016 10:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 07/15/2016 10:14 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>>> However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
>>>> only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second can be
>>>> still documented e.g. as deprecated.
>>>
>>> Still, both of them are present in the driver. Shouldn't it be reflected
>>> in the documentation?
>>
>> Right, it is a good practice, so how about:
>>
>> - compatible : should be one of:
>> "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
>> "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
>> "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
>>
>> Deprecated: "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg"
>>
>> (or any other formatting)
>> plus update to DTS changing it to 4210?
>
> Why newer 4212 version should be made deprecated?
I don't mind the other way. However it seems logical to me that newer
chip is compatible with existing one so the existing one (older) is
used. When adding support for new devices, for most of re-usable drivers
we use old compatibles. But as I said, it doesn't really matter to me.
BR,
Krzysztof
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
2016-07-15 8:33 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
@ 2016-07-15 9:18 ` Jacek Anaszewski
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Jacek Anaszewski @ 2016-07-15 9:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski
Cc: Shuah Khan, robh+dt, pawel.moll, mark.rutland, ijc+devicetree,
galak, kgene, mchehab, andrzej.p, hans.verkuil, javier,
devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel
On 07/15/2016 10:33 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 07/15/2016 10:28 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>> On 07/15/2016 10:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 07/15/2016 10:14 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>>>> However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
>>>>> only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second can be
>>>>> still documented e.g. as deprecated.
>>>>
>>>> Still, both of them are present in the driver. Shouldn't it be reflected
>>>> in the documentation?
>>>
>>> Right, it is a good practice, so how about:
>>>
>>> - compatible : should be one of:
>>> "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
>>> "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
>>> "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
>>>
>>> Deprecated: "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg"
>>>
>>> (or any other formatting)
>>> plus update to DTS changing it to 4210?
>>
>> Why newer 4212 version should be made deprecated?
>
> I don't mind the other way. However it seems logical to me that newer
> chip is compatible with existing one so the existing one (older) is
> used. When adding support for new devices, for most of re-usable drivers
> we use old compatibles. But as I said, it doesn't really matter to me.
Frankly speaking marking a compatible deprecated looks weird to me.
It can be interpreted in the way that the device itself is deprecated
or it is not fully reliable. I'd just accept the patch in the original
form.
--
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
@ 2016-07-15 9:18 ` Jacek Anaszewski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Jacek Anaszewski @ 2016-07-15 9:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 07/15/2016 10:33 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 07/15/2016 10:28 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>> On 07/15/2016 10:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 07/15/2016 10:14 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>>>> However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
>>>>> only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second can be
>>>>> still documented e.g. as deprecated.
>>>>
>>>> Still, both of them are present in the driver. Shouldn't it be reflected
>>>> in the documentation?
>>>
>>> Right, it is a good practice, so how about:
>>>
>>> - compatible : should be one of:
>>> "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
>>> "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
>>> "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
>>>
>>> Deprecated: "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg"
>>>
>>> (or any other formatting)
>>> plus update to DTS changing it to 4210?
>>
>> Why newer 4212 version should be made deprecated?
>
> I don't mind the other way. However it seems logical to me that newer
> chip is compatible with existing one so the existing one (older) is
> used. When adding support for new devices, for most of re-usable drivers
> we use old compatibles. But as I said, it doesn't really matter to me.
Frankly speaking marking a compatible deprecated looks weird to me.
It can be interpreted in the way that the device itself is deprecated
or it is not fully reliable. I'd just accept the patch in the original
form.
--
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
2016-07-15 9:18 ` Jacek Anaszewski
@ 2016-07-15 9:30 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-07-15 9:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jacek Anaszewski
Cc: Shuah Khan, robh+dt, pawel.moll, mark.rutland, ijc+devicetree,
galak, kgene, mchehab, andrzej.p, hans.verkuil, javier,
devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel
On 07/15/2016 11:18 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
> On 07/15/2016 10:33 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 07/15/2016 10:28 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>> On 07/15/2016 10:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 07/15/2016 10:14 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>>>>> However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
>>>>>> only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second
>>>>>> can be
>>>>>> still documented e.g. as deprecated.
>>>>>
>>>>> Still, both of them are present in the driver. Shouldn't it be
>>>>> reflected
>>>>> in the documentation?
>>>>
>>>> Right, it is a good practice, so how about:
>>>>
>>>> - compatible : should be one of:
>>>> "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
>>>> "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
>>>> "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
>>>>
>>>> Deprecated: "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg"
>>>>
>>>> (or any other formatting)
>>>> plus update to DTS changing it to 4210?
>>>
>>> Why newer 4212 version should be made deprecated?
>>
>> I don't mind the other way. However it seems logical to me that newer
>> chip is compatible with existing one so the existing one (older) is
>> used. When adding support for new devices, for most of re-usable drivers
>> we use old compatibles. But as I said, it doesn't really matter to me.
>
> Frankly speaking marking a compatible deprecated looks weird to me.
> It can be interpreted in the way that the device itself is deprecated
> or it is not fully reliable.
Marking a compatible or a property deprecated is commonly used, if
needed of course. It has nothing to do with device being deprecated.
This is documentation for bindings and deprecation affects only
bindings. It is not weird or something strange. We already did this for
some of Exynos compatibles (later removing them) and there are quite
many examples in Documentation already.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
> I'd just accept the patch in the original
> form.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
@ 2016-07-15 9:30 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-07-15 9:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 07/15/2016 11:18 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
> On 07/15/2016 10:33 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 07/15/2016 10:28 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>> On 07/15/2016 10:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 07/15/2016 10:14 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>>>>> However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
>>>>>> only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second
>>>>>> can be
>>>>>> still documented e.g. as deprecated.
>>>>>
>>>>> Still, both of them are present in the driver. Shouldn't it be
>>>>> reflected
>>>>> in the documentation?
>>>>
>>>> Right, it is a good practice, so how about:
>>>>
>>>> - compatible : should be one of:
>>>> "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
>>>> "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
>>>> "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
>>>>
>>>> Deprecated: "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg"
>>>>
>>>> (or any other formatting)
>>>> plus update to DTS changing it to 4210?
>>>
>>> Why newer 4212 version should be made deprecated?
>>
>> I don't mind the other way. However it seems logical to me that newer
>> chip is compatible with existing one so the existing one (older) is
>> used. When adding support for new devices, for most of re-usable drivers
>> we use old compatibles. But as I said, it doesn't really matter to me.
>
> Frankly speaking marking a compatible deprecated looks weird to me.
> It can be interpreted in the way that the device itself is deprecated
> or it is not fully reliable.
Marking a compatible or a property deprecated is commonly used, if
needed of course. It has nothing to do with device being deprecated.
This is documentation for bindings and deprecation affects only
bindings. It is not weird or something strange. We already did this for
some of Exynos compatibles (later removing them) and there are quite
many examples in Documentation already.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
> I'd just accept the patch in the original
> form.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
2016-07-15 9:30 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
@ 2016-07-15 9:37 ` Jacek Anaszewski
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Jacek Anaszewski @ 2016-07-15 9:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski
Cc: Shuah Khan, robh+dt, pawel.moll, mark.rutland, ijc+devicetree,
galak, kgene, mchehab, andrzej.p, hans.verkuil, javier,
devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel
On 07/15/2016 11:30 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 07/15/2016 11:18 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>> On 07/15/2016 10:33 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 07/15/2016 10:28 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>>> On 07/15/2016 10:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>> On 07/15/2016 10:14 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>>>>>> However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
>>>>>>> only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second
>>>>>>> can be
>>>>>>> still documented e.g. as deprecated.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Still, both of them are present in the driver. Shouldn't it be
>>>>>> reflected
>>>>>> in the documentation?
>>>>>
>>>>> Right, it is a good practice, so how about:
>>>>>
>>>>> - compatible : should be one of:
>>>>> "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
>>>>> "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
>>>>> "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
>>>>>
>>>>> Deprecated: "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg"
>>>>>
>>>>> (or any other formatting)
>>>>> plus update to DTS changing it to 4210?
>>>>
>>>> Why newer 4212 version should be made deprecated?
>>>
>>> I don't mind the other way. However it seems logical to me that newer
>>> chip is compatible with existing one so the existing one (older) is
>>> used. When adding support for new devices, for most of re-usable drivers
>>> we use old compatibles. But as I said, it doesn't really matter to me.
>>
>> Frankly speaking marking a compatible deprecated looks weird to me.
>> It can be interpreted in the way that the device itself is deprecated
>> or it is not fully reliable.
>
> Marking a compatible or a property deprecated is commonly used, if
> needed of course. It has nothing to do with device being deprecated.
> This is documentation for bindings and deprecation affects only
> bindings. It is not weird or something strange. We already did this for
> some of Exynos compatibles (later removing them) and there are quite
> many examples in Documentation already.
If this is broadly accepted pattern, then I will not argue against.
Let's proceed as you proposed.
--
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
@ 2016-07-15 9:37 ` Jacek Anaszewski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Jacek Anaszewski @ 2016-07-15 9:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 07/15/2016 11:30 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 07/15/2016 11:18 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>> On 07/15/2016 10:33 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 07/15/2016 10:28 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>>> On 07/15/2016 10:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>> On 07/15/2016 10:14 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>>>>>> However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
>>>>>>> only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second
>>>>>>> can be
>>>>>>> still documented e.g. as deprecated.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Still, both of them are present in the driver. Shouldn't it be
>>>>>> reflected
>>>>>> in the documentation?
>>>>>
>>>>> Right, it is a good practice, so how about:
>>>>>
>>>>> - compatible : should be one of:
>>>>> "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
>>>>> "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
>>>>> "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
>>>>>
>>>>> Deprecated: "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg"
>>>>>
>>>>> (or any other formatting)
>>>>> plus update to DTS changing it to 4210?
>>>>
>>>> Why newer 4212 version should be made deprecated?
>>>
>>> I don't mind the other way. However it seems logical to me that newer
>>> chip is compatible with existing one so the existing one (older) is
>>> used. When adding support for new devices, for most of re-usable drivers
>>> we use old compatibles. But as I said, it doesn't really matter to me.
>>
>> Frankly speaking marking a compatible deprecated looks weird to me.
>> It can be interpreted in the way that the device itself is deprecated
>> or it is not fully reliable.
>
> Marking a compatible or a property deprecated is commonly used, if
> needed of course. It has nothing to do with device being deprecated.
> This is documentation for bindings and deprecation affects only
> bindings. It is not weird or something strange. We already did this for
> some of Exynos compatibles (later removing them) and there are quite
> many examples in Documentation already.
If this is broadly accepted pattern, then I will not argue against.
Let's proceed as you proposed.
--
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
2016-07-15 9:37 ` Jacek Anaszewski
@ 2016-07-15 22:09 ` Shuah Khan
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Shuah Khan @ 2016-07-15 22:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jacek Anaszewski, Krzysztof Kozlowski
Cc: robh+dt, pawel.moll, mark.rutland, ijc+devicetree, galak, kgene,
mchehab, andrzej.p, hans.verkuil, javier, devicetree,
linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel, Shuah Khan
Hi Krzysztof and Jacek,
Thanks for the review.
On 07/15/2016 03:37 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
> On 07/15/2016 11:30 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 07/15/2016 11:18 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>> On 07/15/2016 10:33 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 07/15/2016 10:28 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>>>> On 07/15/2016 10:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 07/15/2016 10:14 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>>>>>>> However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
>>>>>>>> only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second
>>>>>>>> can be
>>>>>>>> still documented e.g. as deprecated.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Still, both of them are present in the driver. Shouldn't it be
>>>>>>> reflected
>>>>>>> in the documentation?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right, it is a good practice, so how about:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - compatible : should be one of:
>>>>>> "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
>>>>>> "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
>>>>>> "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Deprecated: "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (or any other formatting)
>>>>>> plus update to DTS changing it to 4210?
I am sending the v2 doc patch that adds samsung,exynos4212-jpeg as
deprecated to begin with.
thanks,
-- Shuah
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] media: Doc add missing documentation for samsung,exynos4212-jpeg
@ 2016-07-15 22:09 ` Shuah Khan
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Shuah Khan @ 2016-07-15 22:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Hi Krzysztof and Jacek,
Thanks for the review.
On 07/15/2016 03:37 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
> On 07/15/2016 11:30 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 07/15/2016 11:18 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>> On 07/15/2016 10:33 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 07/15/2016 10:28 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>>>> On 07/15/2016 10:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 07/15/2016 10:14 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>>>>>>> However if these compatibles are exactly equal then
>>>>>>>> only one should be preferred. It makes everything easier. Second
>>>>>>>> can be
>>>>>>>> still documented e.g. as deprecated.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Still, both of them are present in the driver. Shouldn't it be
>>>>>>> reflected
>>>>>>> in the documentation?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right, it is a good practice, so how about:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - compatible : should be one of:
>>>>>> "samsung,s5pv210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos3250-jpeg",
>>>>>> "samsung,exynos4210-jpeg", "samsung,exynos5420-jpeg",
>>>>>> "samsung,exynos5433-jpeg";
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Deprecated: "samsung,exynos4212-jpeg"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (or any other formatting)
>>>>>> plus update to DTS changing it to 4210?
I am sending the v2 doc patch that adds samsung,exynos4212-jpeg as
deprecated to begin with.
thanks,
-- Shuah
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread