Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] Introduce "non-pixel" sub node within iris video node

Krzysztof Kozlowski
2025-07-03T12:54:15Z

On 03/07/2025 14:38, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>
>
> On 03-Jul-25 09:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 03/07/2025 00:26, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 02, 2025 at 01:06:17PM +0100, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
>>>> On 02/07/2025 13:01, Vikash Garodia wrote:
>>>>>> Anyway, in other messages I explained what is missing. You are changing
>>>>>> existing hardware and you clearly must explain how existing hardware is
>>>>>> affected, how can we reproduce it, how users are affected.
>>>>> Exactly all of these i have explained in the commit message. The limitation with
>>>>> existing hardware binding usage and how my new approach mitigates that limition.
>>>>>
>>>>> Coming to usecase, i made a generic comment saying usecases which needs higher
>>>>> IOVA, i can add the explicit detail about usecase like 8k or higher
>>>>> concurrencies like 32 or higher concurrent sessions.
>>>>
>>>> Why not make this change for a new SoC, instead of an existing ?
>>>
>>> Because we definitely want to improve support for older SoCs too.
>>
>> Older SoCs came with completely new drivers and bindings, instead of
>> evolving existing Venus, so they for sure came with correct code and
>> correct binding.
>
> No, this is a terrible assumption to make, and we've been
> through this time and time again - a huge portion of the code
> submitted in the early days of linux-arm-msm did the bare minimum

We do not talk about early days of linux-arm-msm, but latest where they
rejected existing venus drivers and instead insisted on completely new
driver iris. This is a new code, so how early days are applicable?

> to present a feature, without giving much thought to the sanity of
> hw description, be it on a block or platform level.

You are saying that iris driver was again shoved without any sanity? It
should have never been merged then. Better to grow existing insanity
than allow to have two insanities - old venus and new iris.

>
> That's why we're still adding clocks to mdss, regulators to camera
> etc. etc. to this day. And it's only going to get worse when there
> will be a need or will to add S2disk support with register

We speak about iris here only.

Best regards,
Krzysztof