Re: [PATCH v3 03/19] media: venus: pm_helpers: Add kerneldoc to venus_clks_get()

[Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>]

On 4/5/24 10:26, Dikshita Agarwal wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3/27/2024 11:38 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> To make it easier to understand the various clock requirements within
>> this driver, add kerneldoc to venus_clk_get() explaining the fluff.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>
>> ---
>>   drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/pm_helpers.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/pm_helpers.c b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/pm_helpers.c
>> index ac7c83404c6e..cf91f50a33aa 100644
>> --- a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/pm_helpers.c
>> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/pm_helpers.c
>> @@ -23,6 +23,34 @@
>>   
>>   static bool legacy_binding;
>>   
>> +/**
>> + * venus_clks_get() - Get Venus clocks that are not bound to a vcodec
>> + * @core: A pointer to the venus core resource
>> + *
>> + * The Venus block (depending on the generation) can be split into a couple
>> + * of clock domains: one for main logic and one for each video core (0-2 instances).
>> + *
>> + * MSM8916 (and possibly other HFIv1 users) only feature the "main logic"
>> + * domain, so this function is the only kind if clk_get necessary there.
>> + *
>> + * MSM8996 (and other HFIv3 users) feature two video cores, with core0 being
>> + * statically defined a decoder and core1 an encoder, with both having
>> + * their own clock domains.
>> + *
>> + * SDM845 features two video cores, each one of which may or may not be
>> + * subdivided into two encoder/decoder threads.
>> + *
>> + * Other SoCs either feature a single video core (with its own clock domain)
>> + * or one video core and one CVP (Computer Vision Processor) core. In both cases
>> + * we treat it the same way (CVP only happens to live near-by Venus on the SoC).
>> + *
>> + * Due to unfortunate developments in the past, we need to support legacy
> why unfortunate? please re-phrase this.

It's unfortunate because another binding has been created to
represent the same hardware to solve a "problem" that could have
been dealt with using a couple lines of C and that we now need to
carry support for.

Konrad