[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7dfca778-e402-3a6f-617c-dd8448187a13@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2020 07:42:48 +0300
From: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To: Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@...dia.com>,
Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>, thierry.reding@...il.com,
jonathanh@...dia.com, frankc@...dia.com, sakari.ailus@....fi,
helen.koike@...labora.com
Cc: sboyd@...nel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v10 6/9] media: tegra: Add Tegra210 Video input driver
26.04.2020 05:10, Dmitry Osipenko пишет:
> 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?
>
> ...
>>> 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.
Although, you're right that tegra_drm is compiled as a single module.
That's not good, I'm actually not sure now whether it is possible to
modularize host1x drivers properly without changing the whole host1x bus.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists