Re: [PATCH 4/7] misc: Add driver for DAB IP found on Renesas R-Car devices
From: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar>
Date: 2021-03-02 11:59:08
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, linux-devicetree, linux-media, linux-renesas-soc, lkml
Hello everyone, On Mon, 1 Mar 2021 at 14:36, Fabrizio Castro [off-list ref] wrote:
Hi Arnd, Thanks for your feedback!quoted
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> Sent: 26 February 2021 10:38 Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] misc: Add driver for DAB IP found on Renesas R- Car devices On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 11:51 PM Fabrizio Castro [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
The DAB hardware accelerator found on R-Car E3 and R-Car M3-N devices is a hardware accelerator for software DAB demodulators. It consists of one FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) module and one decoder module, compatible with DAB specification (ETSI EN 300 401 and ETSI TS 102 563). The decoder module can perform FIC decoding and MSC decoding processing from de-puncture to final decoded result. This patch adds a device driver to support the FFT module only. Signed-off-by: Fabrizio Castro <fabrizio.castro.jz@renesas.com> --- MAINTAINERS | 7 ++ drivers/misc/Kconfig | 1 + drivers/misc/Makefile | 1 + drivers/misc/rcar_dab/Kconfig | 11 ++ drivers/misc/rcar_dab/Makefile | 8 ++ drivers/misc/rcar_dab/rcar_dev.c | 176 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ drivers/misc/rcar_dab/rcar_dev.h | 116 ++++++++++++++++++++ drivers/misc/rcar_dab/rcar_fft.c | 160 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/uapi/linux/rcar_dab.h | 35 ++++++Can you explain why this is not in drivers/media/?I wasn't entirely sure were to put it to be honest as I couldn't find anything similar, that's why "misc" for v1, to mainly get a feedback and advice.quoted
I don't think we want a custom ioctl interface for a device that implements a generic specification. My first feeling would be that this should not have a user-level API but instead get called by the DAB radio driver.I hear you, the trouble is that the modules of this IP should be seen as part of a SW and HW processing pipeline. Some of the SW components of the pipeline can be proprietary, and unfortunately we don't have access (yet) to a framework that allows us to test and demonstrate the whole pipeline, for the moment we can only test things in isolation. It'll take us a while to come up with a full solution (or to have access to one), and in the meantime our SoCs come with an IP that can't be used because there is no driver for it (yet). After discussing things further with Geert and Laurent, I think they are right in saying that the best path for this is probably to add this driver under "drivers/staging" as an interim solution, so that the IP will be accessible by developers, and when we have everything we need (a fully fledged processing framework), we will able to integrate it better with the other components (if possible).quoted
What is the intended usage model here? I assume the idea is to use it in an application that receives audio or metadata from DAB. What driver do you use for that?This IP is similar to a DMA to some extent, in the sense that it takes input data from a buffer in memory and it writes output data onto a buffer in memory, and of course it does some processing in between.
That sounds like something that can fit V4L2 MEM2MEM driver. You queue two buffers and an operation, and then run a job.
It's not directly connected to any other Radio related IP. The user space application can read DAB IQ samples from the R-Car DRIF interface (via driver drivers/media/platform/rcar_drif.c, or from other sources since this IP is decoupled from DRIF), and then when it's time to accelerate FFT, FIC, or MSC, it can request services to the DAB IP, so that the app can go on and use the processor to do some work, while the DAB IP processes things. A framework to connect and exchange processing blocks (either SW or HW) and interfaces is therefore vital to properly place a kernel implementation in the great scheme of things, in its absence a simple driver can help
I'm not entirely sure we are missing a framework. What's missing in V4L2 MEM2MEM? Before considering drivers/staging, it would be interesting to figure out if V4L2 can do it as-is, and if not, discuss what's missing. Thanks, Ezequiel