On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 7:18 PM Frank Binns <Frank.Binns@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2024-05-30 at 16:35 +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
> > The MediaTek MT8173 comes with a PowerVR Rogue GX6250, which is part
> > of the Series6XT, another variation of the Rogue family of GPUs.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_drv.c | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_drv.c
> > index 5c3b2d58d766..3d1a933c8303 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_drv.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_drv.c
> > @@ -1475,6 +1475,7 @@ pvr_remove(struct platform_device *plat_dev)
> >
> > static const struct of_device_id dt_match[] = {
> > { .compatible = "img,img-axe", .data = NULL },
> > + { .compatible = "img,powervr-6xt", .data = NULL },
>
> I assume that by adding this to the list of supported devices we're essentially
> freezing the existing uapi. This concerns me, as we've not yet started running
> Vulkan conformance on any Series6XT GPUs and there's a chance we may need to
> make some tweaks.
>
> I'm not really sure what the accepted approach is to hardware enablement /
> experimental support. I'm not sure if it's sufficient to hide support behind a
> Kconfig option and/or module parameter or whether we just have to hold this
> patch back for the time being.
I guess this is more of a question for the DRM maintainers.
Added a couple Panfrost/Panthor folks for ideas.
ChenYu
> Thanks
> Frank
>
> > {}
> > };
> > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, dt_match);
