[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b3fa00e8b66658e120279e37261cbdb5db7edf52.camel@mediatek.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2021 09:17:13 +0800
From: "yunfei.dong@...iatek.com" <yunfei.dong@...iatek.com>
To: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@...guardiasur.com.ar>
CC: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...omium.org>,
Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@...all.nl>,
Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...omium.org>,
"Tiffany Lin" <tiffany.lin@...iatek.com>,
Andrew-CT Chen <andrew-ct.chen@...iatek.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...gle.com>,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@...omium.org>,
Fritz Koenig <frkoenig@...omium.org>,
Irui Wang <irui.wang@...iatek.com>,
linux-media <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
srv_heupstream <srv_heupstream@...iatek.com>,
"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support"
<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group
<Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@...iatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6, 00/15] Using component framework to support multi
hardware decode
Hi Ezequiel,
Thanks for your feedback,
The driver can work well now according to your advice with
of_platform_populate interface.
In order to separate parent node with children node, parent node is
master device, children node is component device.
The master and component are registered platform device.
Could you please help to review the patch again when you are free:
https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/project/linux-media/cover/20211011070247.792-1-yunfei.dong@mediatek.com/
Best Regards,
Yunfei Dong
On Sun, 2021-09-26 at 11:51 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Sept 2021 at 05:27, yunfei.dong@...iatek.com
> <yunfei.dong@...iatek.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ezequiel,
> >
> > Could you please help to give some feedback when you are free for
> > iommu
> > limitation?
> >
>
> How about you work on the architecture I originally suggested?
>
> As the saying goes, talk is cheap, show us the code.
> So let's see the code and let's discuss the limitations
> with the code.
>
> > According to google's suggestion, it's better not to use v4l2 async
> > also.
>
> Hum? I haven't seen such objection on the mailing list.
>
> Thanks,
> Ezequiel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists