[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ebb87316-189b-3c54-d53e-3732e60cec75@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 17:13:08 +0100
From: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>
To: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Cc: rfoss@...nel.org, todor.too@...il.com, agross@...nel.org,
andersson@...nel.org, konrad.dybcio@...aro.org, mchehab@...nel.org,
hverkuil-cisco@...all.nl, sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com,
andrey.konovalov@...aro.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/9] media: qcom: camss: Fix VFE-480
vfe_disable_output()
On 28/08/2023 18:17, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>> vfe-480 is copied from vfe-17x and has the same racy idle timeout bug as in
>> 17x.
>>
>> Fix the vfe_disable_output() logic to no longer be racy and to conform
>> to the 17x way of quiescing and then resetting the VFE.
> How about dropping the duplicate function and share a single
> implementation for the two files ?
>
Hmm, so I looked at this.
In principle I like it. Right now vfe-170 only deals with a single
write-master = 0, whereas vfe-480 deals with multiple write-masters.
Collapsing down into one place is the right thing to do however, it
feels like a larger update to vfe-170 that merits its own series along
the lines of "Support multiple write-masters for vfe-17x" or better
still "Support virtual channels for vfe-17x" which is what is implied by
this.
Yet another thing to add to the TODO list here.
---
bod
Powered by blists - more mailing lists