Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 31 Mar 2021 10:44:57 -0500
From:   Benoit Parrot <bparrot@ti.com>
To:     Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ideasonboard.com>
CC:     Pratyush Yadav <p.yadav@ti.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com>,
        Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
        Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@gmail.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>,
        Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@xs4all.nl>,
        Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@chromium.org>,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
        Stanimir Varbanov <stanimir.varbanov@linaro.org>,
        Helen Koike <helen.koike@collabora.com>,
        Michael Tretter <m.tretter@pengutronix.de>,
        Peter Chen <peter.chen@nxp.com>,
        Chunfeng Yun <chunfeng.yun@mediatek.com>,
        <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-phy@lists.infradead.org>,
        <dmaengine@vger.kernel.org>, Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/16] media: ti-vpe: csi2rx: Add CSI2RX support
Message-ID: <20210331154456.t6edvpw6mfwlf2zg@ti.com>
References: <20210330173348.30135-1-p.yadav@ti.com>
 <20210330173348.30135-14-p.yadav@ti.com>
 <91bbf2a9-9d27-7f9b-1c17-ad6544a828f1@ideasonboard.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <91bbf2a9-9d27-7f9b-1c17-ad6544a828f1@ideasonboard.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20171215
Precedence: bulk

Pratyush,

Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ideasonboard.com> wrote on Wed [2021-Mar-31 09:06:35 +0300]:
> Hi,
> 
> On 30/03/2021 20:33, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
> > TI's J721E uses the Cadence CSI2RX and DPHY peripherals to facilitate
> > capture over a CSI-2 bus.
> > 
> > The Cadence CSI2RX IP acts as a bridge between the TI specific parts and
> > the CSI-2 protocol parts. TI then has a wrapper on top of this bridge
> > called the SHIM layer. It takes in data from stream 0, repacks it, and
> > sends it to memory over PSI-L DMA.
> > 
> > This driver acts as the "front end" to V4L2 client applications. It
> > implements the required ioctls and buffer operations, passes the
> > necessary calls on to the bridge, programs the SHIM layer, and performs
> > DMA via the dmaengine API to finally return the data to a buffer
> > supplied by the application.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Pratyush Yadav <p.yadav@ti.com>
> > ---
> >   MAINTAINERS                               |   7 +
> >   drivers/media/platform/Kconfig            |  11 +
> >   drivers/media/platform/ti-vpe/Makefile    |   1 +
> >   drivers/media/platform/ti-vpe/ti-csi2rx.c | 964 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   4 files changed, 983 insertions(+)
> >   create mode 100644 drivers/media/platform/ti-vpe/ti-csi2rx.c
> 
> Some quick comments:
> 
> "ti-vpe" directory is not correct, this has nothing to do with VPE. That
> said, the directory has already been abused by having CAL driver there,
> perhaps we should rename the directory just to "ti". But if we do that,
> I think we should have subdirs for cal, vpe and this new one.

I agree with Tomi here. This should create a ti directory under
media/platform and then add a directory under that specifically for this
driver/IP as a first step. Not sure what the correct name for that
directory should be but it should meaningful. As a follow on step then the
other drivers can be relocated to a proper directory structure.
> 
> "ti-csi2rx" is rather generic name. TI has had CSI-2 RX IPs before (CAL)
> and probably will also have new ones in the future. If there's no clear
> model name for the IP, as I think is the case here, it's probably best
> to just use the SoC model in the name. E.g. the DSS on J7 is
> "ti,j721e-dss".
> 
> This driver implements the legacy video API. I think it would be better
> (and easier to maintain) to only implement the media-controller API,
> unless you specifically need to support the legacy API for existing
> userspace.

We just went through a major rework with CAL to make it media controller
compatible in order to be able to handle CSI2 virtual channels.
I think as this is a new driver/IP which perform the same type of service
it makes sense to make use the more current API instead of the legacy one.

> 
>  Tomi

Benoit