On 20/04/2021 11:31, Benjamin Gaignard wrote:
>
> 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 ?
A separate patch series would be easier for me.
Regards,
Hans
>
> Regards,
> Benjamin
>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Hans
>>
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
