Re: [PATCH 0/7] media: iris: add support for kaanapali platform

[Vikash Garodia]

On 1/27/2026 5:22 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 04:56:34PM +0530, Vikash Garodia wrote:
> > On 1/26/2026 7:08 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 05:55:43PM +0530, Vikash Garodia wrote:
> > > > Qualcomm kaanapali platform have a newer generation of video IP iris4.
> > > > The hardware have evolved mostly with respect to higher number of power
> > > > domains as well as multiple clock sources.
> > > >
> > > > The series extends support for multiple iommu-map entries for the same
> > > > input id. Considering iris as a client driver, it adds the handling for
> > > > multiple stream ids from VPU via iommu-map.
> > > >
> > > > This series is depend on the below series:
> > > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260121055400.937856-1-vijayanand.jitta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> > > >
> > > > Following are the compliance and functional validation reports.
> > >
> > > Please validate with fluster too. Having a "knowingly good" command line
> > > is not a validation. It can't be reproduced by anybody else.
> >
> > Below is the fluster result on kaanapali (will add in cover letter in next
> > revision)
>
> Nice, thanks!
>
> > H264:
> > 77/135 while testing JVT-AVC_V1 with GStreamer-H.264-V4L2-Gst1.0.JVT-AVC_V1.
>
> What about the extension testsuites? Even if they are not supported,
> they should not crash or cause the timeouts.
>
> > - 52 test vectors failed due to interlaced clips - not supported
>
> Yet or completely? Does "failed" mean "returned an error" or something
> else?

completely. Driver returns error on firmware detecting the content as 
interlace.

> > - 3 test vectors failed due to unsupported bitstream.
> > - 2 test vectors failed because SP_SLICE type - not supported by the
> >    hardware.
> > - 1 test vector failed due to unsupported profile
> >
> > H265:
> >   129/147 testcases passed while testing JCT-VC-HEVC_V1 with
> >   GStreamer-H.265-V4L2-Gst1.0.
> >   The failing test case:
> >   - 10 testcases failed due to unsupported 10 bit format.
>
> MAIN10? I was actually surprised, Venus driver supported them for the
> Iris2 hardware. Is it somethething to be fixed in future?

10bit would be added in iris. We are catching up with all the codecs, 
10bit should be next from decoder side.

> >   - 4 testcase failed due to unsupported resolution
>
> Can it be fixed?
>
> >   - 2 testcase failed due to CRC mismatch
>
> Which means an error in the testsuite or somewhere on our side?
>
> >   - 2 test fails due to session error (under debug)
> >     - PICSIZE_C_Bossen_1
> >     - WPP_E_ericsson_MAIN_2
> >
> > VP9:
> > 235/305 testcases passed while testing VP9-TEST-VECTORS with
> >   GStreamer-VP9-V4L2-Gst1.0.
> >   The failing test case:
> >   - 64 testcases failed due to unsupported resolution
>
> Can it be fixed?
>
> >   - 2 testcases failed due to unsupported format
>
> Hmm?
>
> >   - 1 testcase failed with CRC mismatch (fails with ref decoder as well)
>
> Could you please raise an issue against fluster?
>
> >   - 2 testcase failed due to unsupported resolution after sequence change
>
> Can it be fixed?
>
> >   - 1 testcase failed due to unsupported stream
>
> ?
>
> > > > gstreamer test:
> > > > Decoders validated with below commands, codec specific:
> > > > gst-launch-1.0 multifilesrc location=<input_file.h264> stop-index=0 !
> > > > parsebin ! v4l2h264dec ! video/x-raw ! videoconvert dither=none !
> > > > video/x-raw,format=I420 ! filesink location=<output_file.yuv>
> > >
> > > Neither of these commands specify, what exactly was validated. They
> > > specify that you've validated _some_ videos. It's impossible to even
> > > reproduce your results, because you don't specify which files you've
> > > used.
> >
> > commands are shared indicating the pipeline used for validation for
> > different codec plugins. These are some basic encode and decode commands,
> > and shared for reference for anyone to pick input test files of their own.
>
> Thanks, but it would also be helpful if you stated, which filesets were
> used for validation. There are enough public filesets for testing video
> decoders.

Ack, will add that info in the cover letter in next revision.

> > > > gst-launch-1.0 multifilesrc location=<input_file.hevc> stop-index=0 !
> > > > parsebin ! v4l2h265dec ! video/x-raw ! videoconvert dither=none !
> > > > video/x-raw,format=I420 ! filesink location=<output_file.yuv>
> > > >
> > > > gst-launch-1.0 filesrc location=<input_file.webm> stop-index=0 !
> > > > parsebin ! vp9dec ! video/x-raw ! videoconvert dither=none !
> > > > video/x-raw,format=I420 ! filesink location=<output_file.yuv>
> > > >
> > > > Encoders validated with below commands:
> > > > gst-launch-1.0 -v filesrc location=<input_file.yuv> ! rawvideoparse
> > > > format=nv12 width=<width> height=<height> framerate=30/1 ! v4l2h264enc
> > > > capture-io-mode=4 output-io-mode=4 ! filesink sync=true
> > > > location=<output_file.h264>
> > >
> > > At least these should use test sinks in order to be reproducible.
> >
> > it is using filesink in the pipeline to generate the encoded bitstream
>
> I should have been more explicit: test sinks to generate the image.

If you could suggest a gst pipeline for it, i can give it a try.

Regards,
Vikash