Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 26 Aug 2022 17:39:47 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: arm: mediatek: mmsys: change compatible for MT8195 | From | Matthias Brugger <> |
| |
On 26/08/2022 09:13, Bo-Chen Chen wrote: > On Fri, 2022-08-26 at 15:00 +0800, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 26/08/2022 05:07, Bo-Chen Chen wrote: >>> On Thu, 2022-08-25 at 22:57 +0800, Matthias Brugger wrote: >>>> >>>> On 25/08/2022 11:14, Bo-Chen Chen wrote: >>>>> From: "Jason-JH.Lin" <jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com> >>>>> >>>>> For previous MediaTek SoCs, such as MT8173, there are 2 display >>>>> HW >>>>> pipelines binding to 1 mmsys with the same power domain, the >>>>> same >>>>> clock driver and the same mediatek-drm driver. >>>>> >>>>> For MT8195, VDOSYS0 and VDOSYS1 are 2 display HW pipelines >>>>> binding >>>>> to >>>>> 2 different power domains, different clock drivers and >>>>> different >>>>> mediatek-drm drivers. >>>>> >>>>> Moreover, Hardware pipeline of VDOSYS0 has these components: >>>>> COLOR, >>>>> CCORR, AAL, GAMMA, DITHER. They are related to the PQ (Picture >>>>> Quality) >>>>> and they makes VDOSYS0 supports PQ function while they are not >>>>> including in VDOSYS1. >>>>> >>>>> Hardware pipeline of VDOSYS1 has the component ETHDR (HDR >>>>> related >>>>> component). It makes VDOSYS1 supports the HDR function while >>>>> it's >>>>> not >>>>> including in VDOSYS0. >>>>> >>>>> To summarize0: >>>>> Only VDOSYS0 can support PQ adjustment. >>>>> Only VDOSYS1 can support HDR adjustment. >>>>> >>>>> Therefore, we need to separate these two different mmsys >>>>> hardwares >>>>> to >>>>> 2 different compatibles for MT8195. >>>>> >>>>> Fixes: 81c5a41d10b9 ("dt-bindings: arm: mediatek: mmsys: add >>>>> mt8195 >>>>> SoC binding") >>>>> Signed-off-by: Jason-JH.Lin <jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Bo-Chen Chen <rex-bc.chen@mediatek.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> Changes for v2: >>>>> 1. Add hardware difference for VDOSYS0 and VDOSYS1 in commit >>>>> message. >>>>> --- >>>>> >>>>> .../devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yaml >>>>> | >>>>> 3 ++- >>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git >>>>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys >>>>> .yam >>>>> l >>>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys >>>>> .yam >>>>> l >>>>> index 6ad023eec193..bfbdd30d2092 100644 >>>>> --- >>>>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys >>>>> .yam >>>>> l >>>>> +++ >>>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys >>>>> .yam >>>>> l >>>>> @@ -31,7 +31,8 @@ properties: >>>>> - mediatek,mt8183-mmsys >>>>> - mediatek,mt8186-mmsys >>>>> - mediatek,mt8192-mmsys >>>>> - - mediatek,mt8195-mmsys >>>>> + - mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0 >>>> >>>> Thanks for you patch. As I mentioned on v1, I propose to set >>>> mediatek,mt8195-mmsys as fallback for mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0 to >>>> not >>>> break >>>> backwards compatibility. >>>> >>>> Apart from that, the binding change will need some changes to >>>> support >>>> the new >>>> binding. Please provide these together with this patch. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Matthias >>>> >>> >>> Hello Matthias, >>> >>> Thanks for your comments. >>> The purpose of this patch is to confirm we can separate mt8195 >>> mmsys >>> into two compatibles. I think this modification is accepted. >> >> No, it is not accepted following Matthias comments. You received my >> ack >> based on assumption that ABI break is perfectly ok for platform >> maintainer, as he has decisive voice. If anyone is not happy with a >> ABI >> break, then his concerns must be addressed. >> >> So let it be specific: >> NAK. >> >>> >>> After this, I think Jason-JH will push another series with this >>> binding >>> patch. >> >> I don't know what do you mean here - another series on top of wrong >> patch? >> > > Hello Krzysztof, > > For this mt8195 mmsys binding separation, we still need to modify > driver for this. The reason I send this patch is to confirm we can do > this binding modification and I also think we can not pick this patch > here. > > We will push another series and it contains modification of binding and > drivers. (The series will push by Jason-JH Lin) >
Sounds good. So lets wait for Jason-JH Lin to send this series and we can go on with the review.
Thanks! Matthias
> Maybe I should use "RFC" for this series, and I think it's more > correct. > > BRs, > Bo-Chen > >>> In Jason-JH's series, we will modify mmsys driver based on this. >>> And I think we don't need to keep "mediatek,mt8195-mmsys" if we >>> also >>> modify mmsys drivers in the same series. >> >> This does not fux ABI break and broken bisectability. >> >>> >>> Is it ok that postpones to pick this patch until we finish review >>> follow-up series? >>> >> >> No. You got a clear review to fix. >> >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof >
| |