Re: [PATCH 13/13] media: qcom: camss: Add support for VFE hardware version Titan 780

[Bryan O'Donoghue]

On 12/08/2024 15:41, Depeng Shao wrote:
> +void camss_reg_update(struct camss *camss, int hw_id, int port_id, bool is_clear)
> +{
> +	struct csid_device *csid;
> +
> +	if (hw_id < camss->res->csid_num) {
> +		csid = &(camss->csid[hw_id]);
> +
> +		csid->res->hw_ops->reg_update(csid, port_id, is_clear);
> +	}
> +}

The naming here doesn't make the action clear

hw_ops->rup_update(csid, port, clear);

"is_clear" is not required since the type is a bool the "is" is implied 
in the the logical state so just "clear" will do.

But re: my previous comment on having the ISR do the clear as is done in 
the VFE 480, I don't think this is_clear parameter is warranted.

We want the calling function to request the rup_update() for the 
rup_update() function to wait on completion and the ISR() to do the 
clear once the RUP interrupt has been raised.

At least I think that's how it should work - could you please experiment 
with your code for the flow - as it appears to match the VFE 480 logic.

---
bod