Re: [PATCH v9 13/13] media: ti: Add CSI2RX support for J721E

[Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>]

On 29-08-23, 18:55, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Jai,
> 
> (CC'ing Vinod, the maintainer of the DMA engine subsystem, for a
> question below)

Sorry this got lost

> 
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 03:55:06PM +0530, Jai Luthra wrote:
> > On Aug 15, 2023 at 16:00:51 +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> > > On 11/08/2023 13:47, Jai Luthra wrote:
> > > > From: Pratyush Yadav <p.yadav@ti.com>
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > > > +static int ti_csi2rx_start_streaming(struct vb2_queue *vq, unsigned int count)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	struct ti_csi2rx_dev *csi = vb2_get_drv_priv(vq);
> > > > +	struct ti_csi2rx_dma *dma = &csi->dma;
> > > > +	struct ti_csi2rx_buffer *buf;
> > > > +	unsigned long flags;
> > > > +	int ret = 0;
> > > > +
> > > > +	spin_lock_irqsave(&dma->lock, flags);
> > > > +	if (list_empty(&dma->queue))
> > > > +		ret = -EIO;
> > > > +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dma->lock, flags);
> > > > +	if (ret)
> > > > +		return ret;
> > > > +
> > > > +	dma->drain.len = csi->v_fmt.fmt.pix.sizeimage;
> > > > +	dma->drain.vaddr = dma_alloc_coherent(csi->dev, dma->drain.len,
> > > > +					      &dma->drain.paddr, GFP_KERNEL);
> > > > +	if (!dma->drain.vaddr)
> > > > +		return -ENOMEM;
> > > 
> > > This is still allocating a large buffer every time streaming is started (and
> > > with streams support, a separate buffer for each stream?).
> > > 
> > > Did you check if the TI DMA can do writes to a constant address? That would
> > > be the best option, as then the whole buffer allocation problem goes away.
> > 
> > I checked with Vignesh, the hardware can support a scenario where we 
> > flush out all the data without allocating a buffer, but I couldn't find 
> > a way to signal that via the current dmaengine framework APIs. Will look 
> > into it further as it will be important for multi-stream support.
> 
> That would be the best option. It's not immediately apparent to me if
> the DMA engine API supports such a use case.
> dmaengine_prep_interleaved_dma() gives you finer grain control on the
> source and destination increments, but I haven't seen a way to instruct
> the DMA engine to direct writes to /dev/null (so to speak). Vinod, is
> this something that is supported, or could be supported ?

Write to a dummy buffer could have the same behaviour, no?

> 
> > > Alternatively, can you flush the buffers with multiple one line transfers?
> > > The flushing shouldn't be performance critical, so even if that's slower
> > > than a normal full-frame DMA, it shouldn't matter much. And if that can be
> > > done, a single probe time line-buffer allocation should do the trick.
> > 
> > There will be considerable overhead if we queue many DMA transactions 
> > (in the order of 1000s or even 100s), which might not be okay for the 
> > scenarios where we have to drain mid-stream. Will have to run some 
> > experiments to see if that is worth it.
> > 
> > But one optimization we can for sure do is re-use a single drain buffer 
> > for all the streams. We will need to ensure to re-allocate the buffer 
> > for the "largest" framesize supported across the different streams at 
> > stream-on time.
> 
> If you implement .device_prep_interleaved_dma() in the DMA engine driver
> you could write to a single line buffer, assuming that the hardware would
> support so in a generic way.
> 
> > My guess is the endpoint is not buffering a full-frame's worth of data, 
> > I will also check if we can upper bound that size to something feasible.
> > 
> > > Other than this drain buffer topic, I think this looks fine. So, I'm going
> > > to give Rb, but I do encourage you to look more into optimizing this drain
> > > buffer.
> > 
> > Thank you!
> > 
> > > Reviewed-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ideasonboard.com>
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> 
> Laurent Pinchart

-- 
~Vinod