Re: [PATCH v2 01/10] media: hantro: Fix H264 max frmsize supported on RK3288

[Hans Verkuil]

On 10/31/19 9:52 AM, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 01:24:47 +0000
> Jonas Karlman <jonas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> TRM specify supported image size 48x48 to 4096x2304 at step size 16 pixels,
>> change frmsize max_width/max_height to match TRM at [1].
>>
>> This patch makes it possible to decode the 4096x2304 sample at [2].
>>
>> [1] http://www.t-firefly.com/download/firefly-rk3288/docs/TRM/rk3288-chapter-25-video-encoder-decoder-unit-(vcodec).pdf
>> [2] https://4ksamples.com/puppies-bath-in-4k/
>>
>> Fixes: 760327930e10 ("media: hantro: Enable H264 decoding on rk3288")
>> Signed-off-by: Jonas Karlman <jonas@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Let's also add
> 
> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> just in case this patch doesn't make it to 5.4.
> 
> 
>> ---
>> Changes in v2:
>>   - updated commit message with reference to TRM and sample video
>> ---
>>  drivers/staging/media/hantro/rk3288_vpu_hw.c | 4 ++--
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/hantro/rk3288_vpu_hw.c b/drivers/staging/media/hantro/rk3288_vpu_hw.c
>> index c0bdd6c02520..f8db6fcaad73 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/media/hantro/rk3288_vpu_hw.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/media/hantro/rk3288_vpu_hw.c
>> @@ -67,10 +67,10 @@ static const struct hantro_fmt rk3288_vpu_dec_fmts[] = {
>>  		.max_depth = 2,
>>  		.frmsize = {
>>  			.min_width = 48,
>> -			.max_width = 3840,
>> +			.max_width = 4096,
>>  			.step_width = MB_DIM,
>>  			.min_height = 48,
>> -			.max_height = 2160,
>> +			.max_height = 2304,
>>  			.step_height = MB_DIM,
> 
> Hans, Mauro, we were intending to have this fix merged in 5.4 or at
> the very least be backported to the 5.4 stable branch at some point,
> the problem is, this patch is based on media/master which contains the
> s/MB_DIM_H264/MB_DIM/ change. I can send a new version based on
> media/fixes, but that means Linus will have a conflict when merging the
> media 5.5 PR in his tree. Are you fine dealing with this conflict
> (letting Linus know about the expected resolution or backmerging the -rc
> containing the fix in media/master so that he doesn't even have to deal
> with it), or should we just let this patch go in media/master and
> backport it later?

Backport it later once it is merged in mainline.

This patch doesn't fix a bug, it is really an enhancement, so I think this
can safely be delayed.

Regards,

	Hans

> 
>>  		},
>>  	},
>