Hi,

On 09/20/2018 06:31 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 2:55 AM Vikash Garodia [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 2018-09-19 20:30, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:

quoted

Hi Alex,

On 09/19/2018 10:32 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 8:43 AM Vikash Garodia
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Add routine to reset the ARM9 and brings it out of reset. Also
abstract the Venus CPU state handling with a new function. This
is in preparation to add PIL functionality in venus driver.

Signed-off-by: Vikash Garodia <redacted>
---
 drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/core.h         |  2 ++
 drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/firmware.c     | 33
++++++++++++++++++++++++
 drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/firmware.h     | 11 ++++++++
 drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/hfi_venus.c    | 13 +++-------
 drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/hfi_venus_io.h |  7 +++++
 5 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/core.h

b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/core.h
index 2f02365..dfd5c10 100644

--- a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/core.h
+++ b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/core.h

@@ -98,6 +98,7 @@ struct venus_caps {
  * @dev:               convenience struct device pointer
  * @dev_dec:   convenience struct device pointer for decoder device
  * @dev_enc:   convenience struct device pointer for encoder device
+ * @no_tz:     a flag that suggests presence of trustzone

Looks like it suggests the absence of trustzone?

Actually I would rename it as use_tz and set it if TrustZone is used.
This would avoid double-negative statements like what we see below.

I find this suggestion reasonable.

Initially i planned to keep it as a positive flag. The reason behind
keeping it
as no_tz was to keep the default value of this flag to 0 indicating tz
is present
by default.
I can switch it to use_tz though and set it in firmware_init after the
presence of
firmware node is checked.

Making sure the flag is explicitly initialized instead of relying on
default initialization is another good reason to have that change
IMHO. :)

Vikash, care to send a new version, or will fix that with follow up patches?

-- 
regards,
Stan