Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8250: Add JPEG encoder node

[Gjorgji Rosikopulos (Consultant)]

Hi Dmitry,

On 8/3/2026 9:44 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 09:02:26PM +0300, Atanas Filipov wrote:
>> On 7/30/2026 7:01 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 06:05:24PM +0300, Atanas Filipov wrote:
>>>> Add the JPEG encoder hardware node to the SM8250 device tree so the
>>>> qcom-jpeg V4L2 encoder driver can bind and operate on this platform.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Atanas Filipov <atanas.filipov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250.dtsi | 72 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>   1 file changed, 72 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250.dtsi
>>>> index f11da2ca4181..d42b29419320 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250.dtsi
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250.dtsi
>>>> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
>>>>   #include <dt-bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.h>
>>>>   #include <dt-bindings/gpio/gpio.h>
>>>>   #include <dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,osm-l3.h>
>>>> +#include <dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,icc.h>
>>>>   #include <dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,sm8250.h>
>>>>   #include <dt-bindings/mailbox/qcom-ipcc.h>
>>>>   #include <dt-bindings/phy/phy-qcom-qmp.h>
>>>> @@ -4486,6 +4487,77 @@ cci1_i2c1: i2c-bus@1 {
>>>>   			};
>>>>   		};
>>>> +		jpeg-encoder@ac53000 {
>>>> +			compatible = "qcom,sm8250-jpeg-enc";
>>>> +			status = "disabled";
>>>> +
>>>> +			reg = <0x0 0x0ac53000 0x0 0x1000>;
>>>> +
>>>> +			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 474 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
>>>> +
>>>> +			power-domains = <&camcc TITAN_TOP_GDSC>,
>>>> +					<&rpmhpd RPMHPD_MMCX>,
>>>
>>> Is TITAN_TOP a part of the MMCX or CX domain? In the former case,
>>> please drop separate mmcx vote here and let it come through the
>>> titan_top (it might require camcc driver and node modifications).
>>>
>>
>> The change was requested by Brian, most likely in connection with upcoming
>> migrations. I think he would be able to explain the exact reasons. As far as
>> the facts are concerned, this is not currently necessary for the driver to
>> be functional.
> 
> There is no word _driver_ in the _dt bindings_. What is the actual
> hardware wrapping? What is being powered by which domain? Is MMCX
> directly powering something? Or is it gated by TITAN_TOP_GDSC? I assume
> that MX is powering on PLLs, correct?

Yes i agree there is no word driver in the dt_bindings but you get my point,
with only TITAN_TOP_GDSC hw is fully functional there is no need of additional MMCX 
power domain. 

> 
>>>> +
>>>> +				opp-100000000 {
>>>> +					opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <400000000>,
>>>> +						 /bits/ 64 <100000000>;
>>>> +					required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_min_svs>;
>>>
>>> This looks a bit strange. Are you sure that PLL levels match the MMCX /
>>> internal clock levels? I think you need to vote on both domains.
> 
> This is not addressed / responded.

Yes this need to be checked. I will get back when we get info for this...

Regards,
~Gjorgji