Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:7 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:7;
Message-ID: <fdd775e5-1e43-4f65-b444-da6b83e3df5b@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 25 Oct 2023 11:40:04 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] media: qcom: camss: Use common VFE
 pm_domain_on/pm_domain_off where applicable
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>, hverkuil-cisco@xs4all.nl,
        laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com, rfoss@kernel.org,
        todor.too@gmail.com, agross@kernel.org, andersson@kernel.org,
        mchehab@kernel.org
Cc:     linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20231024224255.754779-1-bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>
 <20231024224255.754779-3-bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>
 <d0d30b6b-3664-4531-a71f-6faec3330d2c@linaro.org>
From:   Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <d0d30b6b-3664-4531-a71f-6faec3330d2c@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 25/10/2023 10:18, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> educe the pattern down to a common callback. VFE 4.1 is a special case
>> which to me also indicates that it is worthwhile maintaining an 
>> indirection
>> for the vfe_pm_domain_{on|off} for now.
> Are there issues when powering it off like all the others?

4.1 doesn't have a VFE power-domain just a top level controller PD, 
however I think a blank callback is neater than

if (vfe->pm_domain_on) {
     vfe->pd_domain_on();
}

its just vfe->pm_domain_on(); at the cost of 1 or 2 instructions for 
indirection.

---
bod