> -----Original Message----- > From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab [mailto:mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 5:32 PM > To: Laurent Pinchart > Cc: Karicheri, Muralidharan; Hiremath, Vaibhav; davinci-linux-open- > source@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [Resubmit: PATCH-V2] Introducing ti-media directory > > Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > Hi Murali, > > > > On Tuesday 23 March 2010 18:52:44 Karicheri, Muralidharan wrote: > >> Laurent, > >> > >>>> I'm not too sure to like the ti-media name. It will soon get quite > >>>> crowded, and name collisions might occur (look at the linux-omap-camera > >>>> tree and the ISP driver in there for instance). Isn't there an internal > >>>> name to refer to both the DM6446 and AM3517 that could be used ? > >>> [Hiremath, Vaibhav] Laurent, > >>> > >>> ti-media directory is top level directory where we are putting all TI > >>> devices drivers. So having said that, we should worrying about what goes > >>> inside this directory. > >>> For me ISP is more generic, if you compare davinci and OMAP. > >>> > >>> Frankly, there are various naming convention we do have from device to > >>> device, even if the IP's are being reused. For example, the internal > name > >>> for OMAP is ISP but Davinci refers it as a VPSS. > >> Could you explain what name space issue you are referring to in > >> linux-omap-camera since I am not quite familiar with that tree? > > > > The linux-omap-camera tree contains a driver for the OMAP3 ISP. Basically, > > most source files start with the "isp" prefix and are stored in > > drivers/media/video/isp/. > > > > ISP is quite a generic name, and other vendors will probably develop an > ISP at > > some point (if not already done), so there's already a potential name > conflict > > today. > > > > Using a dedicated directory in drivers/media/video for TI-specific cores > is > > definitely a good idea (assuming the same IP cores won't be used by other > > vendors in the future). > > > > My concern is that, if we move the ISP driver in drivers/media/video/ti- > media, > > the directory will soon get quite crowded. If a new TI processor comes up > with > > a totally incompatible ISP, we will get a name conflict in > > drivers/media/video/ti-media. I was thinking about either replacing the > "isp" > > prefix with "omap3isp" (or similar), or moving the driver to > > drivers/media/video/ti-media/omap3isp, but that will impede code sharing > code > > between the Davinci and OMAP processor families. That's where my > uncertainty > > comes from. > > There are two separate points here. The first one is re-using a driver or > some > symbols. Whatever directory structure is used, this won't prevent to share > the code. > Just create the header files under include/media and be sure that the Kbuild > system will properly handle the dependencies, with "depends on". > > > > >> Myself and Vaibhav had discussed this in the past and ti-media is the > >> generic name that we could agree on. On DM SoCs (DM6446, DM355, DM365) I > >> expect ti-media to be the home for all vpfe and vpbe driver files. Since > >> we had a case of common IP across OMAP and DMxxx SoCs, we want to place > >> all OMAP and DMxxx video driver files in a common directory so that > >> sharing the drivers across the SoCs will be easy. We could discuss and > >> agree on another name if need be. Any suggestions? > > > > It's not the name ti-media that I don't agree on, it's just that this will > > move the problem one step further in the directory hierarchy without > actually > > solving it :-) > > > > Is it guaranteed today that no TI processors with new generation video > blocks > > will reuse the names ISP, VPFE and VPBE ? The OMAP3 datasheet refers to > VPFE > > and VPBE, but luckily those blocks are further divided into subblocks, and > the > > driver doesn't refer to the VPFE and VPBE directly. > > I agree that a name like ti-media would be too generic. Also, if we take a > look on > how the drivers are currently organized, the trees aren't vendor-based, but > chipset-design based. There are even some cases where there's just one or > two C files that > are directly stored under drivers/media/video (like tvp5150, for example). > > IMO, simpler drivers where just one or a couple of files are needed should > be stored > into drivers/media/video. Bigger drivers should be organized by family, and > not by vendor. > Otherwise, we would need to re-organize the tree to be coherent. > > One interesting example of the a per-family directory is cx25840. The same > driver > is used by several different chipsets. The driver supports a separate IC > chip (cx25836, > cx2584x), and two designs where the decoder logic is inside an IC chip with > the bridge > and other functional blocks (cx23885 and cx231xx). > [Hiremath, Vaibhav] Mauro and Laurent, What is the conclusion on this directory naming convention issue? Actually the V4L2 display driver patch (submitted by me) is dependent on this patch, and due to this it is blocked. As mentioned by Murali, considering the number of files and reusability we come up the ti-media directory naming structure. And also Laurent has admitted that we need to have directory for ti specific device drivers. If we go with the Mauro's suggestion (family based directory structure) then the directory structure would look like - Drivers/media/video/ - omap/ - davinci/ - ... - much more Why I was not very keen on this approach is, there are some devices publically known as OMAPx device but makes use of some of davinci video IP's. And in the coming future probability of such cris-cross interfacing of IP's are going to increase. So if we create directory with ti-media, easy to understand. Thanks, Vaibhav > > -- > > Cheers, > Mauro -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
