On 12/3/2025 2:54 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
On Tue, Dec 02, 2025 at 03:43:17PM +0530, Vikash Garodia wrote:
On 12/2/2025 2:06 PM, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 10:25:23AM +0000, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
On 21/11/2025 11:37, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
Sorry.
Did we actually come up with a cogent reason to omit the video firmware
loading here ?
AFAIU it is required for Lemans and Glymur - leaving it out is blocking
getting video stuff done and storing up trouble.
What exactly is the blockage - is it something you want help with ?
I replied to you here[1] and given my reason..till something concluded on
"multi-cell IOMMU[2]", I can not add video and block what is working
already.
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20251105081421.f6j7ks5bd4dfgr67@hu-mojha-
hyd.qualcomm.com/
Why though ?
You are mixing together the issue of multiple SIDs and the original loading
of firmware which could easily reuse the venus method of
&iris {
video-firmware {
iommus = <&apss_smmu hex>;
};
};
I completely understand what you are saying, and it would be very easy
for me to do that if it gets accepted. However, I doubt that the people
who raised this concern would agree with the approach.
I’m not sure if the video team would like to pursue pixel/non-pixel/firmware
context
banks separately. I’ll leave this to @Vikas to answer.
Not exactly as a separate sub-node, but i do like the idea of introducing a
simple iommu property, something like this, which Stephan proposed earlier
in the discussion [1]
firmware-iommus = <&apps_smmu ...>;
I understand that we are doing the iommu-map thing, but a property
exclusively for firmware like above look much simpler to me.
"We know we need to find a generic solution to this very problem, but
while we work on that let's add this quick hack to the ABI"?
I would not call that as hack, rather a simpler solution instead of
packing everything into the generic iommu-map.
"firmware-iommus" is much more readable to interpret something running
in el2 mode, than digging into function ids inside iommu-map and then
matching it up with specific SIDs to confirm.
Dmitry/ Bryan/ Krzysztof if you are good with this, we can bring back video
in this series. Please share your thoughts on this.
Please let's keep these concerns separate, so that we don't hold this
series up further. Even if we choose to go by the subnode approach, in
the same time frame, it's better to discuss it separately.
ACK.
Regards,
Bjorn
Regards,
Vikash
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
Also, I do not want the video PIL discussion to be part of this series, as it
could
unnecessarily give the impression that this series depends on it.
That binding got dropped because it was unused in Iris.
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
I still fail to see why we are waiting for multi-cell IOMMU to land, when it
is expected to and what the VPU enablement story is upstream in the
meantime.
Blocked it seems.
No, it is ongoing, there will be next version coming.
---
bod
