Re: [PATCH 1/6] media: dt-bindings: Document SC8280XP/SM8350 Venus

[Bryan O'Donoghue]

On 07/08/2023 19:55, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 7.08.2023 20:49, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> > On 07/08/2023 19:45, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> > > That can be taken care of with match data.
> > >
> > > Konrad
> >
> > Well perhaps.
> >
> > I'm just sticking my oar in, to elucidate.
> >
> > The compat sub-nodes aren't just a random choice with no logic. They exist to select between what you assign the blocks to be, encoder, decoder or any admixture thereof.
> >
> > A functionality we want to maintain.
> Surely something like a modparam would be more suitable here?
>
> Konrad

Hmm.

Well from earlier in the thread the question "why do we have these 
compat strings" is because we can have any combination of 
encoder/decoder assigned.

If there's a cogent argument _still_ to be made to transition to some 
new way of assignment then fine so long as we don't break that basic 
flexibility.

Though my own €0.02 is that a module parameter is more of a PITA than a 
compat string.

OTOH I could make the argument, that the high probability is most people 
- probably all, just instantiate a single encoder and decoder and aren't 
aware of or using the inbuilt flexibility.

@stan probably has the right idea what to do.

---
bod