Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: dts: mt8192: Add vcodec lat and core nodes

From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
To: "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>,
	"Allen-KH Cheng (程冠勳)" <Allen-KH.Cheng@mediatek.com>,
	"matthias.bgg@gmail.com" <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
	"robh+dt@kernel.org" <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
	Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group
	<Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@mediatek.com>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: dts: mt8192: Add vcodec lat and core nodes
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 10:30:36 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <514f8de1-1a23-1947-80cd-6136e17af490@collabora.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <186bc17e-56d2-f125-aab9-f47bf3f45b79@linaro.org>

Il 28/09/22 19:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski ha scritto:
> On 28/09/2022 09:58, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
>> Il 28/09/22 09:04, Krzysztof Kozlowski ha scritto:
>>> On 27/09/2022 12:17, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, my bad. I alsways run `make dtbs_check` to confirm dtb with
>>>>> bindings. I just think we didn't limit node names in mtk-vodec
>>>>> bindings. I will pay attention next time.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Since currently the vcodec lat and core nodes are absent from the mtk
>>>>> dts, do you think the child node name should be changed to something
>>>>> more general (ex: video-codec) in mediatek,vcodec-subdev-decoder
>>>>> bindings?
>>>>
>>>> The video codec is mt8192-vcodec-dec, while the other nodes are describing
>>>> the VPU instances (and/or vpu cores)... I'm not sure.
>>>>
>>>> Krzysztof, please, can you give your opinion on that?
>>>>
>>>
>>> What's the difference between them? I understand parent device is entire
>>> block of consisting of multiple processing units? If so, video-codec
>>> actually could fit in both places. But feel free to call it a bit
>>> different (video-codec-core, video-codec-lat, processing-unit, even
>>> something less generic). Sometimes it's tricky to find nice name, so I
>>> wouldn't worry too much in that case. Just not "mt8192-vcodec" :)
>>>
>>
>> The parent device is the entire block consisting of multiple processing units
>> and has "global" control registers; children are LAT(s) and processing cores.
>>
>>   From my understanding, the processing cores are physical cores of one big VPU
>> and, depending on the actual (current gen) SoC, the VPU may have one or two
>> cores.
>>
>> Right now, the bindings want vcodec-latX@addr, vcodec-coreX@addr (where X is
>> a number, like vcodec-core0, vcodec-core1) but, in my opinion, changing that
>> to video-codec-lat@addr and video-codec-core@addr would be more descriptive.
>>
>> ...Or should we simply leave the bindings as they are and just go with the
>> abbreviated "vcodec-(hwtype)" names?
> 
> video-codec-lat sounds better, but I am not sure if it is worth the
> churn, so I am fine with both.
> 

Thank you Krzysztof!

Allen, can you please change the binding to use "video-codec-lat" and
"video-codec-core" (so change "vcodec" to "video-codec") and then use
these names for this commit?

Doing the change right now won't break the ABI, as there's no devicetree
using that binding yet (with this commit adding the first user), so you
can safely go for the rename without any complication.

Regards,
Angelo

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel