Hi Aakarsh > -----Original Message----- > From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2023 1:54 PM > To: Aakarsh Jain <aakarsh.jain@xxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-arm- > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx; andrzej.hajda@xxxxxxxxx; > mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx; hverkuil-cisco@xxxxxxxxx; > krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; dillon.minfei@xxxxxxxxx; > david.plowman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; mark.rutland@xxxxxxx; > robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-samsung- > soc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; andi@xxxxxxxxxxx; gost.dev@xxxxxxxxxxx; > alim.akhtar@xxxxxxxxxxx; aswani.reddy@xxxxxxxxxxx; > pankaj.dubey@xxxxxxxxxxx; ajaykumar.rs@xxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > fsd@xxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [Patch v4 01/11] dt-bindings: media: s5p-mfc: Add mfcv12 > variant > > On 26/10/2023 15:31, Aakarsh Jain wrote: > > Hello Krzysztof > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Sent: 25 October 2023 18:30 > >> To: Aakarsh Jain <aakarsh.jain@xxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-arm- > >> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > >> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> Cc: m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx; andrzej.hajda@xxxxxxxxx; > >> mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx; hverkuil-cisco@xxxxxxxxx; > >> krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; dillon.minfei@xxxxxxxxx; > >> david.plowman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; mark.rutland@xxxxxxx; > >> robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-samsung- > >> soc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; andi@xxxxxxxxxxx; gost.dev@xxxxxxxxxxx; > >> alim.akhtar@xxxxxxxxxxx; aswani.reddy@xxxxxxxxxxx; > >> pankaj.dubey@xxxxxxxxxxx; ajaykumar.rs@xxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > >> fsd@xxxxxxxxx > >> Subject: Re: [Patch v4 01/11] dt-bindings: media: s5p-mfc: Add mfcv12 > >> variant > >> > >> On 25/10/2023 12:22, Aakarsh Jain wrote: > >>> Add Tesla FSD MFC(MFC v12) compatible. > >>> > >>> Cc: linux-fsd@xxxxxxxxx > >>> Signed-off-by: Aakarsh Jain <aakarsh.jain@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >> > >> No changelog and your cover letter does not explain what happened > here. > >> Specifically, why did you decide to ignore received tag. > >> > > Last patch series we had two different patches for schema which was one > for adding MFCv12 compatible string and other for adding its HW properties. > > In one of the patches you gave reviewed-by tag. Since mfc dt_schema got > merged already, and this is relatively new patch so thought of getting > reviewed again. > > > > Link to those patches: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux- > media/patch/20221011122516.32135-2-aakarsh.jain@xxxxxxxxxxx/ > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux- > media/patch/20221011122516.32135-3-aakarsh.jain@xxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > if you are ok, I will add your reviewed-by in next patch series. > > It is okay to drop Reviewed-by tag, but this should be explicitly mentioned in > the changelog with a reason. > > > > >>> .../bindings/media/samsung,s5p-mfc.yaml | 16 > ++++++++++++++++ > >>> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/samsung,s5p- > >> mfc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/samsung,s5p- > >> mfc.yaml > >>> index 084b44582a43..c30eb309f670 100644 > >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/samsung,s5p- > mfc.yaml > >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/samsung,s5p- > mfc.yaml > >>> @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ properties: > >>> - samsung,mfc-v7 # Exynos5420 > >>> - samsung,mfc-v8 # Exynos5800 > >>> - samsung,mfc-v10 # Exynos7880 > >>> + - tesla,fsd-mfc # Tesla FSD > >>> - items: > >>> - enum: > >>> - samsung,exynos3250-mfc # Exynos3250 > >>> @@ -165,6 +166,21 @@ allOf: > >>> minItems: 1 > >>> maxItems: 2 > >>> > >>> + - if: > >>> + properties: > >>> + compatible: > >>> + contains: > >>> + enum: > >>> + - tesla,fsd-mfc > >>> + then: > >>> + properties: > >>> + clocks: > >>> + maxItems: 1 > >>> + clock-names: > >>> + items: > >>> + - const: mfc > >>> + iommus: false > >> > >> That's odd. How so? MFC v12 does not support IOMMU? > >> > > MFC v12 do support IOMMU. But currently it is not enabled in SW (has > dependencies on some of the floating dma-mapping patches) and not tested > on upstream kernel. > > Bindings describe hardware, not software. > > > Current patch sets intend to add support for MFCv12 using reserve > memory and later patches related to enable iommu will be posted (after > resolving the dependencies). So I marked iommu property as false. > > Now what is your suggestion here? Should I keep iommu as false or add > memory-region as below? > > I expect complete picture of the hardware, not something limited to current > driver, so for sure iommus must be there. > As Krzysztof mentioned, DT binding should explain all the hardware features supported by SoC / IPs. Incase a feature is not enabled for some reason, that need to be handled in the dts file. > Please wrap your emails according to mailing lists rules. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof
