lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Apr]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH v10 6/9] media: tegra: Add Tegra210 Video input driver
From
Date

On 4/25/20 7:10 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> 26.04.2020 04:43, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет:
> ...
>>> It looks to me that at least all those hardcoded HW format IDs do not
>>> match the older SoCs.
>> TPG hard coded formats are supported on prior Tegra.
>>
>> Other supported formats are SoC dependent and part of soc data in the
>> driver already.
> But I don't see where that SoC-dependent definition is made in
> terga210.c. That tegra_image_format enum looks T210-specific, isn't it?
>
> ...

Video formats which are SoC variants are made soc specific in driver
already tegra_vi_soc structure member video_formats

tegra_image_format enum is same for T210 and T186

For T194, enums will be diff and will have diff TEGRA194_VIDEO_FORMAT
using corresponding Tegra194 video format enums

>>> The driver will need to have a bit better separation if it's supposed to
>>> have a common core for all SoCs. Each incompatible VI/CSI hardware
>>> version should have its own kernel module.
>> currently other Tegra host1x driver (drm) also does similar. Single
>> module for all Tegra SoCs.
> DRM driver has a proper separation of the sub-drivers where sub-driver
> won't load on unsupported hardware. The tegra-video driver should do the
> same, i.e. VI and CSI should be individual drivers (and not OPS). There
> could be a some common core, but for now it's not obvious to me what
> that core should be, maybe just the video.c.
>
>> With current tegra-video, all the v4l2 related common part of
>> implementation is same for all tegra's and only
>> tegra210.c/tegra186.c/tegra194.c will have corresponding tegra soc
>> specific vi/csi programming sequence.
> This code shouldn't be shared within the same driver module, IMO.
>
>
>>> The tegra-video should be okay, although the "video" part sounds a bit
>>> too broad since video could mean a lot of things. I think downstream
>>> kernel uses (or at least used) the tegra-camera name for the driver,
>>> perhaps it could be a reasonable variant as well.
>> prior feedback suggests not to use camera variant instead to use video
> Alright, then the tegra-video should be fine.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-04-26 04:20    [W:0.079 / U:14.788 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site