On Sat, Aug 23, 2025 at 05:53:50PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > The Qualcomm SoC Iris video codec is an evolution of previous Venus and > it comes with its own Iris Linux drivers. These new drivers were > accepted under condition they actually improve state of afairs, instead > of duplicating old, legacy solutions. > > Unfortunately binding still references common parts of Venus without > actual need and benefit. For example Iris does not use fake > "video-firmware" device node (fake because there is no actual device > underlying it and it was added only to work around some Linux issues > with IOMMU mappings). > > Stop referencing venus-common schema in the new Qualcomm Iris bindings > and move all necessary properties, except unused "video-firmware" (no > driver usage, no DTS). > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/media/qcom,sm8550-iris.yaml | 13 ++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/qcom,sm8550-iris.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/qcom,sm8550-iris.yaml > index c79bf2101812..320227f437a1 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/qcom,sm8550-iris.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/qcom,sm8550-iris.yaml > @@ -26,6 +26,9 @@ properties: > - qcom,sm8550-iris > - qcom,sm8650-iris > > + reg: > + maxItems: 1 > + > power-domains: > maxItems: 4 > > @@ -45,6 +48,12 @@ properties: > - const: core > - const: vcodec0_core > > + firmware-name: > + maxItems: 1 > + > + interrupts: > + maxItems: 1 > + > interconnects: > maxItems: 2 > > @@ -69,6 +78,9 @@ properties: > > dma-coherent: true > > + memory-region: > + maxItems: 1 > + > operating-points-v2: true > > opp-table: > @@ -85,7 +97,6 @@ required: > - dma-coherent > > allOf: > - - $ref: qcom,venus-common.yaml# > - if: Saw your reply on https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/59951c47-1015-4598-a885-25f8f1a27c64@xxxxxxxxxx/ Just trying to understand ABI here, how all of a sudden we remove a binding for a hardware just because it did not get noticed until yet that as it is not a real device and we always say device tree binding should not depend on drivers but the device but we are saying Iris does not use fake "video-firmware" device node for removal. I am a bit confused. Whether removing will not break any ABI as initial binding enables the IRIS related code to use video-firmware, now we are removing it. I believe, removing binding always break ABI ? or is it depend on driver code not using it ? > properties: > compatible: > -- > 2.48.1 > -- -Mukesh Ojha
