Re: [PATCH v2 07/13] media: qcom: camss: Use >= CAMSS_SDM845 for vfe_get/vfe_put

[Konrad Dybcio]

On 17.08.2023 16:38, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> From sdm845 onwards we need to ensure the VFE is powered on prior to
> switching on the CSID.
> 
> Alternatively we could model up the GDSCs and clocks the CSID needs
> without the VFE but, there's a real question of the legitimacy of such a
> use-case.
> 
> For now drawing a line at sdm845 and switching on the associated VFEs is
> a perfectly valid thing to do.
> 
> Rather than continually extend out this clause for at least two new SoCs
> with this same model - making the vfe_get/vfe_put path start to look
> like spaghetti we can simply test for >= sdm845 here.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
Using >= here is veeery arbitrary and depends on the next person
adding a SoC in chronological, or used-tech-chronological order
correctly.. Not a fan!

Konrad