Date:   Thu, 25 Nov 2021 09:00:24 -0300
From:   Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar>
To:     Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>
Cc:     linux-media@vger.kernel.org, nicolas.dufresne@collabora.com,
        mchehab@kernel.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, mripard@kernel.org,
        wens@csie.org, p.zabel@pengutronix.de, andrzej.p@collabora.com,
        gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] media: hantro: move postproc enablement for old cores
Message-ID: <YZ962CvUbKoiIGyZ@eze-laptop>
References: <20211122184702.768341-1-jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>
 <20211122184702.768341-5-jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20211122184702.768341-5-jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hi Jernej,

On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 07:46:59PM +0100, Jernej Skrabec wrote:
> Older G2 cores, like that in Allwinner H6, seem to have issue with
> latching postproc register values if this is first thing done in job.
> Moving that to the end solves the issue.
> 

Any idea what exact register should be written before the post-processor
is enabled, for H6 to work? Also, which of the PP registers need
to be written "at the end"?

> Signed-off-by: Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro_drv.c | 9 ++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro_drv.c b/drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro_drv.c
> index 8c3de31f51b3..530994ab3024 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro_drv.c
> @@ -130,7 +130,7 @@ void hantro_start_prepare_run(struct hantro_ctx *ctx)
>  	v4l2_ctrl_request_setup(src_buf->vb2_buf.req_obj.req,
>  				&ctx->ctrl_handler);
>  
> -	if (!ctx->is_encoder) {
> +	if (!ctx->is_encoder && !ctx->dev->variant->legacy_regs) {

To make this less fragile, do you think it would make sense to
have a dedicated quirk flag, something like "legacy_post_proc",
instead of overloading the meaning of legacy_regs.

What do you think?

Thanks,
Ezequiel

>  		if (hantro_needs_postproc(ctx, ctx->vpu_dst_fmt))
>  			hantro_postproc_enable(ctx);
>  		else
> @@ -142,6 +142,13 @@ void hantro_end_prepare_run(struct hantro_ctx *ctx)
>  {
>  	struct vb2_v4l2_buffer *src_buf;
>  
> +	if (ctx->dev->variant->legacy_regs && !ctx->is_encoder) {
> +		if (hantro_needs_postproc(ctx, ctx->vpu_dst_fmt))
> +			hantro_postproc_enable(ctx);
> +		else
> +			hantro_postproc_disable(ctx);
> +	}
> +
>  	src_buf = hantro_get_src_buf(ctx);
>  	v4l2_ctrl_request_complete(src_buf->vb2_buf.req_obj.req,
>  				   &ctx->ctrl_handler);
> -- 
> 2.34.0
>