Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] media: dt-bindings: mediatek,vcodec: Remove VDEC_SYS for mt8183

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>]

On 21/06/2023 20:00, Nícolas F. R. A. Prado wrote:
>>
>> But anyway this variant comes with some set of regs and reg-names. Other
>> variant comes with different set. In all cases they should be defined,
>> even by "defined" means not allowed.
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean. Are you suggesting to disable reg-names on mt8173?

That's one of the options if for some reason you don't want to define them.

> 
>>
>>>
>>> But in a separate series we could drop vdecsys from mt8173's reg as well,
>>> passing it as a syscon instead, which would solve the warning on that platform,
>>> though some more driver changes would be needed to be able to handle it for that
>>> SoC. The newer SoCs like mt8192, mt8195, etc, should also get vdecsys dropped
>>> from their regs to have a correct memory description.
>>>
>>
>> Sure, but I don't understand how does it affect defining and making
>> specific regs/reg-names or keeping them loose.
> 
> We need some way to tell in the driver whether the first reg is VDEC_SYS or not.
> Since so far reg-names have not been used for the vcodec, the simplest, and
> cleanest, way to do it, is to add reg-names when VDEC_SYS is not present. When
> the other SoCs are updated to no longer have the first reg as VDEC_SYS, they
> would also have reg-names added to their binding, to clearly indicate that.

Don't use reg-names for that. The order of entries is anyway strict.

> 
> For example, for mt8173 we currently have
> 
> 		vcodec_dec: vcodec@16000000 {
> 			compatible = "mediatek,mt8173-vcodec-dec";
> 			reg = <0 0x16000000 0 0x100>,	/* VDEC_SYS */
> 			      <0 0x16020000 0 0x1000>,	/* VDEC_MISC */
> 			      <0 0x16021000 0 0x800>,	/* VDEC_LD */
> 			      <0 0x16021800 0 0x800>,	/* VDEC_TOP */
> 			      <0 0x16022000 0 0x1000>,	/* VDEC_CM */
> 			      <0 0x16023000 0 0x1000>,	/* VDEC_AD */
> 			      <0 0x16024000 0 0x1000>,	/* VDEC_AV */
> 			      <0 0x16025000 0 0x1000>,	/* VDEC_PP */
> 			      <0 0x16026800 0 0x800>,	/* VDEC_HWD */
> 			      <0 0x16027000 0 0x800>,	/* VDEC_HWQ */
> 			      <0 0x16027800 0 0x800>,	/* VDEC_HWB */
> 			      <0 0x16028400 0 0x400>;	/* VDEC_HWG */
> 
> In a future series, when removing VDEC_SYS from it, it would become
> 
> 		vcodec_dec: vcodec@16020000 {
> 			compatible = "mediatek,mt8173-vcodec-dec";
> 			reg = <0 0x16020000 0 0x1000>,	/* VDEC_MISC */
> 			      <0 0x16021000 0 0x800>,	/* VDEC_LD */
> 			      <0 0x16021800 0 0x800>,	/* VDEC_TOP */
> 			      <0 0x16022000 0 0x1000>,	/* VDEC_CM */
> 			      <0 0x16023000 0 0x1000>,	/* VDEC_AD */
> 			      <0 0x16024000 0 0x1000>,	/* VDEC_AV */
> 			      <0 0x16025000 0 0x1000>,	/* VDEC_PP */
> 			      <0 0x16026800 0 0x800>,	/* VDEC_HWD */
> 			      <0 0x16027000 0 0x800>,	/* VDEC_HWQ */
> 			      <0 0x16027800 0 0x800>,	/* VDEC_HWB */
> 			      <0 0x16028400 0 0x400>;	/* VDEC_HWG */
> 			reg-names = "misc", "ld", "top", "cm", "ad", "av", "pp",
>                                     "hwd", "hwq", "hwb", "hwg";

So you want to use reg-names to avoid ABI break. This is not the reason
not to define reg-names for other case.



Best regards,
Krzysztof