Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v9 03/13] media: hantro: Use syscon instead of 'ctrl' register | From | Benjamin Gaignard <> | Date | Tue, 20 Apr 2021 11:31:16 +0200 |
| |
Le 20/04/2021 à 11:16, Hans Verkuil a écrit : > On 20/04/2021 11:10, Benjamin Gaignard wrote: >> Le 16/04/2021 à 17:14, Lucas Stach a écrit : >>> Am Freitag, dem 16.04.2021 um 15:08 +0200 schrieb Benjamin Gaignard: >>>> Le 16/04/2021 à 12:54, Lucas Stach a écrit : >>>>> Am Mittwoch, dem 07.04.2021 um 09:35 +0200 schrieb Benjamin Gaignard: >>>>>> In order to be able to share the control hardware block between >>>>>> VPUs use a syscon instead a ioremap it in the driver. >>>>>> To keep the compatibility with older DT if 'nxp,imx8mq-vpu-ctrl' >>>>>> phandle is not found look at 'ctrl' reg-name. >>>>>> With the method it becomes useless to provide a list of register >>>>>> names so remove it. >>>>> Sorry for putting a spoke in the wheel after many iterations of the >>>>> series. >>>>> >>>>> We just discussed a way forward on how to handle the clocks and resets >>>>> provided by the blkctl block on i.MX8MM and later and it seems there is >>>>> a consensus on trying to provide virtual power domains from a blkctl >>>>> driver, controlling clocks and resets for the devices in the power >>>>> domain. I would like to avoid introducing yet another way of handling >>>>> the blkctl and thus would like to align the i.MX8MQ VPU blkctl with >>>>> what we are planning to do on the later chip generations. >>>>> >>>>> CC'ing Jacky Bai and Peng Fan from NXP, as they were going to give this >>>>> virtual power domain thing a shot. >>>> That could replace the 3 first patches and Dt patche of this series >>>> but that will not impact the hevc part, so I wonder if pure hevc patches >>>> could be merged anyway ? >>>> They are reviewed and don't depend of how the ctrl block is managed. >>> I'm not really in a position to give any informed opinion about that >>> hvec patches, as I only skimmed them, but I don't see any reason to >>> delay patches 04-11 from this series until the i.MX8M platform issues >>> are sorted. AFAICS those things are totally orthogonal. >> Hi Hans, >> What do you think about this proposal to split this series ? >> Get hevc part merged could allow me to continue to add features >> like scaling lists, compressed reference buffers and 10-bit supports. > Makes sense to me!
Great ! If the latest version match your expectations how would you like to processed ? Can you merged patches 4 to 12 ? or should I resend them in a new shorted series ?
Regards, Benjamin
> > Regards, > > Hans >
| |