Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 9 Oct 2023 17:56:00 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/7] dt-bindings: media: Document STM32MP25 VENC video encoder | From | Hugues FRUCHET <> |
| |
Hi Krzysztof,
On 10/9/23 16:28, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 09/10/2023 16:24, Hugues FRUCHET wrote: >> Hi Krzysztof, >> >> On 10/9/23 15:56, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On 09/10/2023 15:49, Hugues FRUCHET wrote: >>>> Hi Krzysztof, >>>> >>>> On 10/5/23 21:45, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>> On 04/10/2023 11:15, Hugues Fruchet wrote: >>>>>> Add STM32MP25 VENC video encoder bindings. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I don't understand why this binding is separate from video decoder. >>>>> Merge them. >>>> VDEC and VENC are two independent IPs with their own clock, reset, >>>> interrupt & register set, they have their own access to APB/AXI bus. >>>> Moreover future chipsets may embed only VENC or VDEC. >>>> >>>> Hoping that this clarifies the reason of two different bindings. >>> >>> No, it does not. These are no reasons to have independent bindings, >>> except when having actual impact on the bindings. The bindings look >>> identical. What are the differences? >> I'm sorry but I really don't understand your point, these are two >> different IPs with very different registers in it, so why should >> I share that in a single binding ? > > Because the binding is identical. If not, maybe I missed something, so > please point me to differences in the binding.
OK, currently they are identical so I will merge into a single one even if I disagree on that. I hope that in future this will not change otherwise I'll need to revisit that and make separate bindings as initially proposed... I'll so push a v2 with merged version proposal.
> > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
BR, Hugues.
| |