Hi, Sakari, > -----Original Message----- > From: Sakari Ailus [mailto:sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Friday, September 21, 2018 6:52 AM > To: Zhi, Yong <yong.zhi@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Tomasz Figa <tfiga@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Linux Media Mailing List <linux- > media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mani, Rajmohan <rajmohan.mani@xxxxxxxxx>; > Toivonen, Tuukka <tuukka.toivonen@xxxxxxxxx>; Hu, Jerry W > <jerry.w.hu@xxxxxxxxx>; Zheng, Jian Xu <jian.xu.zheng@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 06/12] intel-ipu3: css: Add support for firmware > management > > Hi Yong, > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 10:57:55PM +0000, Zhi, Yong wrote: > ... > > > > +struct imgu_abi_osys_frame_params { > > > > + /* Output pins */ > > > > + __u32 enable; > > > > + __u32 format; /* enum imgu_abi_osys_format */ > > > > + __u32 flip; > > > > + __u32 mirror; > > > > + __u32 tiling; /* enum imgu_abi_osys_tiling */ > > > > + __u32 width; > > > > + __u32 height; > > > > + __u32 stride; > > > > + __u32 scaled; > > > > +} __packed; > > > [snip] > > > > +/* Defect pixel correction */ > > > > + > > > > +struct imgu_abi_dpc_config { > > > > + __u8 __reserved[240832]; > > > > +} __packed; > > > > > > Do we need this structure? One could just add a reserved field in > > > the parent structure. Also, just to confirm, is 240832 really the right > value here? > > > Where does it come from? Please create a macro for it, possibly > > > further breaking it down into the values used to compute this number. > > > > > > > We can add a reserved field in the parent structure, the size is based > > on original definition of dpc config which was removed since it's not > > enabled/used. > > What's your plan with the DPC? If you don't plan to add it now, you could > as well drop the configuration for that block. If there's a need to add it later > on, you can still do it by defining a new struct for the buffer. Or simply > adding it at the end of the existing struct while allowing the use of the old > size without the DPC configuration. > > There would be a little extra work to do there by that time when DPC > support would be added, but OTOH it seems silly to have quarter of a > megabyte of extra stuff to pass around in a struct that's never used. > > -- > Regards, > > Sakari Ailus > sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx It's a very good point, but as I was informed, there is no plan to update the abi between the driver and firmware, so the size of imgu_abi_acc_param has not changed since v1 to maintain the compatibility.
