Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-6549-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Message-ID: <9d94317c-5da9-5494-26a2-12007761a1e5@quicinc.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2023 13:44:10 +0530
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.13.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/34] Qualcomm video encoder and decoder driver
Content-Language: en-US
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
CC: Dikshita Agarwal <quic_dikshita@quicinc.com>,
        <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <stanimir.k.varbanov@gmail.com>, <agross@kernel.org>,
        <andersson@kernel.org>, <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
        <mchehab@kernel.org>, <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>,
        <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>, <quic_abhinavk@quicinc.com>
References: <1702899149-21321-1-git-send-email-quic_dikshita@quicinc.com>
 <a033dfc5-dcf1-4969-ad4d-1836ff9ff0a3@linaro.org>
 <d0ea23ae-8fba-d229-b0f6-dc522f285233@quicinc.com>
 <CAA8EJpouBOLJ_1Pz_YauuOX+97ud9RkLYRaui4GM6ZFJUKYJMw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Vikash Garodia <quic_vgarodia@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAA8EJpouBOLJ_1Pz_YauuOX+97ud9RkLYRaui4GM6ZFJUKYJMw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi,

On 12/20/2023 1:07 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 at 08:32, Vikash Garodia <quic_vgarodia@quicinc.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Dmitry,
>>
>> On 12/19/2023 12:08 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> On 18/12/2023 13:31, Dikshita Agarwal wrote:
>>>> This patch series introduces support for Qualcomm new video acceleration
>>>> hardware architecture, used for video stream decoding/encoding. This driver
>>>> is based on new communication protocol between video hardware and application
>>>> processor.
>>>
>>> This doesn't answer one important point, you have been asked for v1. What is the
>>> actual change point between Venus and Iris? What has been changed so much that
>>> it demands a separate driver. This is the main question for the cover letter,
>>> which has not been answered so far.
>>>
>>> From what I see from you bindings, the hardware is pretty close to what we see
>>> in the latest venus generations. I asssme that there was a change in the vcodec
>>> inteface to the firmware and other similar changes. Could you please point out,
>>> which parts of Venus driver do no longer work or are not applicable for sm8550
>>
>> The motivation behind having a separate IRIS driver was discussed earlier in [1]
>> In the same discussion, it was ellaborated on how the impact would be with
>> change in the new firmware interface and other video layers in the driver. I can
>> add this in cover letter in the next revision.
> 
> Ok. So the changes cover the HFI interface. Is that correct?
Change wise, yes.

>> We see some duplication of code and to handle the same, the series brings in a
>> common code reusability between iris and venus. Aligning the common peices of
>> venus and iris will be a work in progress, once we land the base driver for iris.
> 
> This is not how it usually works. Especially not with the patches you
> have posted.
> 
> I have the following suggestion how this story can continue:
> You can _start_ by reworking venus driver, separating the HFI /
> firmware / etc interface to an internal interface in the driver. Then
> implement Iris as a plug in for that interface. I might be mistaken
> here, but I think this is the way how this can be beneficial for both
> the video en/decoding on both old and new platforms.

HFI/firmware interface is already confined to HFI layer in the existing venus
driver. We explained in the previous discussion [1], on how the HFI change
impacts the other layers by taking example of a DRC usecase. Please have a look
considering the usecase and the impact it brings to other layers in the driver.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8c97d866-1cab-0106-4ab3-3ca070945ef7@quicinc.com/
> Short rationale:
> The venus driver has a history of supported platforms. There is
> already some kind of buffer management in place. Both developers and
> testers have spent their effort on finding issues there. Sending new
> driver means that we have to spend the same amount of efforts on this.
> Moreover, even from the porter point of view. You are creating new
> bindings for the new hardware. Which do not follow the
> venus-common.yaml. And they do not follow the defined bindings for the
> recent venus platforms. Which means that as a developer I have to care
> about two different ways to describe nearly the same hardware.>> Again qualcomm video team does not have a plan to support sm8550/x1e80100 on
>> venus as the changes are too interleaved to absorb in venus driver. And there is
>> significant interest in community to start validating video driver on sm8550 or
>> x1e80100.
>>
>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8c97d866-1cab-0106-4ab3-3ca070945ef7@quicinc.com/
>>
>> Regards,
>> Vikash
> 
> 
>