| Message ID | 1479353915-5043-4-git-send-email-rick.chang@mediatek.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On 17/11/16 04:38, Rick Chang wrote: > Signed-off-by: Rick Chang <rick.chang@mediatek.com> > Signed-off-by: Minghsiu Tsai <minghsiu.tsai@mediatek.com> > --- > This patch depends on: > CCF "Add clock support for Mediatek MT2701"[1] > iommu and smi "Add the dtsi node of iommu and smi for mt2701"[2] > > [1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mediatek/2016-October/007271.html > [2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9164013/ I assume that 1 & 2 will appear in 4.10? So this patch needs to go in after the other two are merged in 4.10? Regards, Hans > --- > arch/arm/boot/dts/mt2701.dtsi | 14 ++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt2701.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt2701.dtsi > index 8f13c70..4dd5048 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt2701.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt2701.dtsi > @@ -298,6 +298,20 @@ > power-domains = <&scpsys MT2701_POWER_DOMAIN_ISP>; > }; > > + jpegdec: jpegdec@15004000 { > + compatible = "mediatek,mt2701-jpgdec"; > + reg = <0 0x15004000 0 0x1000>; > + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 143 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>; > + clocks = <&imgsys CLK_IMG_JPGDEC_SMI>, > + <&imgsys CLK_IMG_JPGDEC>; > + clock-names = "jpgdec-smi", > + "jpgdec"; > + power-domains = <&scpsys MT2701_POWER_DOMAIN_ISP>; > + mediatek,larb = <&larb2>; > + iommus = <&iommu MT2701_M4U_PORT_JPGDEC_WDMA>, > + <&iommu MT2701_M4U_PORT_JPGDEC_BSDMA>; > + }; > + > vdecsys: syscon@16000000 { > compatible = "mediatek,mt2701-vdecsys", "syscon"; > reg = <0 0x16000000 0 0x1000>; >
Hi Hans, On Mon, 2016-11-21 at 15:51 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: > On 17/11/16 04:38, Rick Chang wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Rick Chang <rick.chang@mediatek.com> > > Signed-off-by: Minghsiu Tsai <minghsiu.tsai@mediatek.com> > > --- > > This patch depends on: > > CCF "Add clock support for Mediatek MT2701"[1] > > iommu and smi "Add the dtsi node of iommu and smi for mt2701"[2] > > > > [1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mediatek/2016-October/007271.html > > [2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9164013/ > > I assume that 1 & 2 will appear in 4.10? So this patch needs to go in > after the > other two are merged in 4.10? > > Regards, > > Hans [1] will appear in 4.10, but [2] will appear latter than 4.10.So this patch needs to go in after [1] & [2] will be merged in 4.11. > > --- > > arch/arm/boot/dts/mt2701.dtsi | 14 ++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt2701.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt2701.dtsi > > index 8f13c70..4dd5048 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt2701.dtsi > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt2701.dtsi > > @@ -298,6 +298,20 @@ > > power-domains = <&scpsys MT2701_POWER_DOMAIN_ISP>; > > }; > > > > + jpegdec: jpegdec@15004000 { > > + compatible = "mediatek,mt2701-jpgdec"; > > + reg = <0 0x15004000 0 0x1000>; > > + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 143 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>; > > + clocks = <&imgsys CLK_IMG_JPGDEC_SMI>, > > + <&imgsys CLK_IMG_JPGDEC>; > > + clock-names = "jpgdec-smi", > > + "jpgdec"; > > + power-domains = <&scpsys MT2701_POWER_DOMAIN_ISP>; > > + mediatek,larb = <&larb2>; > > + iommus = <&iommu MT2701_M4U_PORT_JPGDEC_WDMA>, > > + <&iommu MT2701_M4U_PORT_JPGDEC_BSDMA>; > > + }; > > + > > vdecsys: syscon@16000000 { > > compatible = "mediatek,mt2701-vdecsys", "syscon"; > > reg = <0 0x16000000 0 0x1000>; > >
On 22/11/16 04:21, Rick Chang wrote: > Hi Hans, > > On Mon, 2016-11-21 at 15:51 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: >> On 17/11/16 04:38, Rick Chang wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Rick Chang <rick.chang@mediatek.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Minghsiu Tsai <minghsiu.tsai@mediatek.com> >>> --- >>> This patch depends on: >>> CCF "Add clock support for Mediatek MT2701"[1] >>> iommu and smi "Add the dtsi node of iommu and smi for mt2701"[2] >>> >>> [1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mediatek/2016-October/007271.html >>> [2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9164013/ >> >> I assume that 1 & 2 will appear in 4.10? So this patch needs to go in >> after the >> other two are merged in 4.10? >> >> Regards, >> >> Hans > > [1] will appear in 4.10, but [2] will appear latter than 4.10.So this > patch needs to go in after [1] & [2] will be merged in 4.11. So what should I do? Merge the driver for 4.11 and wait with this patch until [2] is merged in 4.11? Does that sound reasonable? Regards, Hans
Hi Hans, On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 13:43 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: > On 22/11/16 04:21, Rick Chang wrote: > > Hi Hans, > > > > On Mon, 2016-11-21 at 15:51 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: > >> On 17/11/16 04:38, Rick Chang wrote: > >>> Signed-off-by: Rick Chang <rick.chang@mediatek.com> > >>> Signed-off-by: Minghsiu Tsai <minghsiu.tsai@mediatek.com> > >>> --- > >>> This patch depends on: > >>> CCF "Add clock support for Mediatek MT2701"[1] > >>> iommu and smi "Add the dtsi node of iommu and smi for mt2701"[2] > >>> > >>> [1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mediatek/2016-October/007271.html > >>> [2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9164013/ > >> > >> I assume that 1 & 2 will appear in 4.10? So this patch needs to go in > >> after the > >> other two are merged in 4.10? > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Hans > > > > [1] will appear in 4.10, but [2] will appear latter than 4.10.So this > > patch needs to go in after [1] & [2] will be merged in 4.11. > > So what should I do? Merge the driver for 4.11 and wait with this patch > until [2] is merged in 4.11? Does that sound reasonable? > > Regards, > > Hans What do you think about this? You merge the driver first and I send this patch again after [1] & [2] is merged.
On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 09:54 +0800, Rick Chang wrote: > Hi Hans, > > On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 13:43 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: > > On 22/11/16 04:21, Rick Chang wrote: > > > Hi Hans, > > > > > > On Mon, 2016-11-21 at 15:51 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: > > >> On 17/11/16 04:38, Rick Chang wrote: > > >>> Signed-off-by: Rick Chang <rick.chang@mediatek.com> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Minghsiu Tsai <minghsiu.tsai@mediatek.com> > > >>> --- > > >>> This patch depends on: > > >>> CCF "Add clock support for Mediatek MT2701"[1] > > >>> iommu and smi "Add the dtsi node of iommu and smi for mt2701"[2] > > >>> > > >>> [1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mediatek/2016-October/007271.html > > >>> [2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9164013/ > > >> > > >> I assume that 1 & 2 will appear in 4.10? So this patch needs to go in > > >> after the > > >> other two are merged in 4.10? > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> > > >> Hans > > > > > > [1] will appear in 4.10, but [2] will appear latter than 4.10.So this > > > patch needs to go in after [1] & [2] will be merged in 4.11. > > > > So what should I do? Merge the driver for 4.11 and wait with this patch > > until [2] is merged in 4.11? Does that sound reasonable? > > > > Regards, > > > > Hans > > What do you think about this? You merge the driver first and I send this > patch again after [1] & [2] is merged. BTW, to prevent merging conflict, the dtsi should be merged by mediatek SoC maintainer, Matthias.I think we can only take care on the driver part at this moment.
Hi Hans, The dependence on [1] has been merged in 4.10, but [2] has not.Do you have any idea about this patch series? Should we wait for [2] or we could merge the source code and dt-binding first? Best Regards, Rick On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 17:43 +0800, Rick Chang wrote: > On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 09:54 +0800, Rick Chang wrote: > > Hi Hans, > > > > On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 13:43 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: > > > On 22/11/16 04:21, Rick Chang wrote: > > > > Hi Hans, > > > > > > > > On Mon, 2016-11-21 at 15:51 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: > > > >> On 17/11/16 04:38, Rick Chang wrote: > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Rick Chang <rick.chang@mediatek.com> > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Minghsiu Tsai <minghsiu.tsai@mediatek.com> > > > >>> --- > > > >>> This patch depends on: > > > >>> CCF "Add clock support for Mediatek MT2701"[1] > > > >>> iommu and smi "Add the dtsi node of iommu and smi for mt2701"[2] > > > >>> > > > >>> [1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mediatek/2016-October/007271.html > > > >>> [2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9164013/ > > > >> > > > >> I assume that 1 & 2 will appear in 4.10? So this patch needs to go in > > > >> after the > > > >> other two are merged in 4.10? > > > >> > > > >> Regards, > > > >> > > > >> Hans > > > > > > > > [1] will appear in 4.10, but [2] will appear latter than 4.10.So this > > > > patch needs to go in after [1] & [2] will be merged in 4.11. > > > > > > So what should I do? Merge the driver for 4.11 and wait with this patch > > > until [2] is merged in 4.11? Does that sound reasonable? > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Hans > > > > What do you think about this? You merge the driver first and I send this > > patch again after [1] & [2] is merged. > > BTW, to prevent merging conflict, the dtsi should be merged by mediatek > SoC maintainer, Matthias.I think we can only take care on the driver > part at this moment. >
Hi Rick, On 01/06/2017 03:34 AM, Rick Chang wrote: > Hi Hans, > > The dependence on [1] has been merged in 4.10, but [2] has not.Do you have > any idea about this patch series? Should we wait for [2] or we could merge > the source code and dt-binding first? Looking at [2] I noticed that the last comment was July 4th. What is the reason it hasn't been merged yet? If I know [2] will be merged for 4.11, then I am fine with merging this media patch series. The dependency of this patch on [2] is something Mauro can handle. If [2] is not merged for 4.11, then I think it is better to wait until it is merged. Regards, Hans > > Best Regards, > Rick > > On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 17:43 +0800, Rick Chang wrote: >> On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 09:54 +0800, Rick Chang wrote: >>> Hi Hans, >>> >>> On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 13:43 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: >>>> On 22/11/16 04:21, Rick Chang wrote: >>>>> Hi Hans, >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, 2016-11-21 at 15:51 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: >>>>>> On 17/11/16 04:38, Rick Chang wrote: >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Rick Chang <rick.chang@mediatek.com> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Minghsiu Tsai <minghsiu.tsai@mediatek.com> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> This patch depends on: >>>>>>> CCF "Add clock support for Mediatek MT2701"[1] >>>>>>> iommu and smi "Add the dtsi node of iommu and smi for mt2701"[2] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mediatek/2016-October/007271.html >>>>>>> [2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9164013/ >>>>>> >>>>>> I assume that 1 & 2 will appear in 4.10? So this patch needs to go in >>>>>> after the >>>>>> other two are merged in 4.10? >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Hans >>>>> >>>>> [1] will appear in 4.10, but [2] will appear latter than 4.10.So this >>>>> patch needs to go in after [1] & [2] will be merged in 4.11. >>>> >>>> So what should I do? Merge the driver for 4.11 and wait with this patch >>>> until [2] is merged in 4.11? Does that sound reasonable? >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Hans >>> >>> What do you think about this? You merge the driver first and I send this >>> patch again after [1] & [2] is merged. >> >> BTW, to prevent merging conflict, the dtsi should be merged by mediatek >> SoC maintainer, Matthias.I think we can only take care on the driver >> part at this moment. >> > > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >
On 09/01/17 12:29, Hans Verkuil wrote: > Hi Rick, > > On 01/06/2017 03:34 AM, Rick Chang wrote: >> Hi Hans, >> >> The dependence on [1] has been merged in 4.10, but [2] has not.Do you have >> any idea about this patch series? Should we wait for [2] or we could merge >> the source code and dt-binding first? > > Looking at [2] I noticed that the last comment was July 4th. What is the reason > it hasn't been merged yet? > > If I know [2] will be merged for 4.11, then I am fine with merging this media > patch series. The dependency of this patch on [2] is something Mauro can handle. > > If [2] is not merged for 4.11, then I think it is better to wait until it is > merged. > I can't take [2] because there is no scpsys in the dts present. It seems that it got never posted. Rick can you please follow-up with James and provide a patch which adds a scpsys node to the mt2701.dtsi? Thanks, Matthias
On 09/01/17 19:45, Matthias Brugger wrote: > > > On 09/01/17 12:29, Hans Verkuil wrote: >> Hi Rick, >> >> On 01/06/2017 03:34 AM, Rick Chang wrote: >>> Hi Hans, >>> >>> The dependence on [1] has been merged in 4.10, but [2] has not.Do you >>> have >>> any idea about this patch series? Should we wait for [2] or we could >>> merge >>> the source code and dt-binding first? >> >> Looking at [2] I noticed that the last comment was July 4th. What is >> the reason >> it hasn't been merged yet? >> >> If I know [2] will be merged for 4.11, then I am fine with merging >> this media >> patch series. The dependency of this patch on [2] is something Mauro >> can handle. >> >> If [2] is not merged for 4.11, then I think it is better to wait until >> it is >> merged. >> > > I can't take [2] because there is no scpsys in the dts present. It seems > that it got never posted. > > Rick can you please follow-up with James and provide a patch which adds > a scpsys node to the mt2701.dtsi? > Ah I forgot, dts patches should go through my tree, so Hans please don't merge this patch. Bindings should go through your branch though. Thanks, Matthias
Hi Matthias, On Mon, 2017-01-09 at 19:45 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote: > > On 09/01/17 12:29, Hans Verkuil wrote: > > Hi Rick, > > > > On 01/06/2017 03:34 AM, Rick Chang wrote: > >> Hi Hans, > >> > >> The dependence on [1] has been merged in 4.10, but [2] has not.Do you have > >> any idea about this patch series? Should we wait for [2] or we could merge > >> the source code and dt-binding first? > > > > Looking at [2] I noticed that the last comment was July 4th. What is the reason > > it hasn't been merged yet? > > > > If I know [2] will be merged for 4.11, then I am fine with merging this media > > patch series. The dependency of this patch on [2] is something Mauro can handle. > > > > If [2] is not merged for 4.11, then I think it is better to wait until it is > > merged. > > > > I can't take [2] because there is no scpsys in the dts present. It seems > that it got never posted. > > Rick can you please follow-up with James and provide a patch which adds > a scpsys node to the mt2701.dtsi? > James sent three MT2701 dts patches [1] two weeks ago, these three patches include scpsys node. Please take a reference. And We will send new MT2701 ionmmu/smi dtsi node patch base on [1] later, thus you can accept and merge to 4.11. [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9489991/ https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9489985/ https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9489989/ Thanks, Eddie
Hi James, On 10/01/17 02:28, Eddie Huang wrote: > Hi Matthias, > > On Mon, 2017-01-09 at 19:45 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote: >> >> On 09/01/17 12:29, Hans Verkuil wrote: >>> Hi Rick, >>> >>> On 01/06/2017 03:34 AM, Rick Chang wrote: >>>> Hi Hans, >>>> >>>> The dependence on [1] has been merged in 4.10, but [2] has not.Do you have >>>> any idea about this patch series? Should we wait for [2] or we could merge >>>> the source code and dt-binding first? >>> >>> Looking at [2] I noticed that the last comment was July 4th. What is the reason >>> it hasn't been merged yet? >>> >>> If I know [2] will be merged for 4.11, then I am fine with merging this media >>> patch series. The dependency of this patch on [2] is something Mauro can handle. >>> >>> If [2] is not merged for 4.11, then I think it is better to wait until it is >>> merged. >>> >> >> I can't take [2] because there is no scpsys in the dts present. It seems >> that it got never posted. >> >> Rick can you please follow-up with James and provide a patch which adds >> a scpsys node to the mt2701.dtsi? >> > > James sent three MT2701 dts patches [1] two weeks ago, these three > patches include scpsys node. Please take a reference. And We will send > new MT2701 ionmmu/smi dtsi node patch base on [1] later, thus you can > accept and merge to 4.11. > Thanks for the clarification. I pulled all this patches into v4.10-next/dts32 Hans will you take v9 of this patch set? Then I'll take the dts patch. Regards, Matthias > [1] > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9489991/ > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9489985/ > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9489989/ > > Thanks, > Eddie > >
Hi Hans, All the dependences of this patch have been merged into v4.10-next.Could you take v9 of this patch set? Matthias will help us to take the dts part. Best Regards, Rick On Fri, 2017-01-13 at 16:02 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote: > Hi James, > > On 10/01/17 02:28, Eddie Huang wrote: > > Hi Matthias, > > > > On Mon, 2017-01-09 at 19:45 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote: > >> > >> On 09/01/17 12:29, Hans Verkuil wrote: > >>> Hi Rick, > >>> > >>> On 01/06/2017 03:34 AM, Rick Chang wrote: > >>>> Hi Hans, > >>>> > >>>> The dependence on [1] has been merged in 4.10, but [2] has not.Do you have > >>>> any idea about this patch series? Should we wait for [2] or we could merge > >>>> the source code and dt-binding first? > >>> > >>> Looking at [2] I noticed that the last comment was July 4th. What is the reason > >>> it hasn't been merged yet? > >>> > >>> If I know [2] will be merged for 4.11, then I am fine with merging this media > >>> patch series. The dependency of this patch on [2] is something Mauro can handle. > >>> > >>> If [2] is not merged for 4.11, then I think it is better to wait until it is > >>> merged. > >>> > >> > >> I can't take [2] because there is no scpsys in the dts present. It seems > >> that it got never posted. > >> > >> Rick can you please follow-up with James and provide a patch which adds > >> a scpsys node to the mt2701.dtsi? > >> > > > > James sent three MT2701 dts patches [1] two weeks ago, these three > > patches include scpsys node. Please take a reference. And We will send > > new MT2701 ionmmu/smi dtsi node patch base on [1] later, thus you can > > accept and merge to 4.11. > > > > Thanks for the clarification. I pulled all this patches into > v4.10-next/dts32 > > Hans will you take v9 of this patch set? > Then I'll take the dts patch. > > Regards, > Matthias > > > [1] > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9489991/ > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9489985/ > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9489989/ > > > > Thanks, > > Eddie > > > >
Hi Rick, On 02/09/2017 03:10 AM, Rick Chang wrote: > Hi Hans, > > All the dependences of this patch have been merged into v4.10-next.Could > you take v9 of this patch set? Matthias will help us to take the dts > part. Apologies for the delay. I'm posting the pull request today, but I don't know if Mauro will pick it up for 4.11. Mauro, since this needs to be coordinated with Matthias can you let him know whether this will go in for 4.11 or 4.12? Regards, Hans > > Best Regards, > Rick > > On Fri, 2017-01-13 at 16:02 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote: >> Hi James, >> >> On 10/01/17 02:28, Eddie Huang wrote: >>> Hi Matthias, >>> >>> On Mon, 2017-01-09 at 19:45 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote: >>>> >>>> On 09/01/17 12:29, Hans Verkuil wrote: >>>>> Hi Rick, >>>>> >>>>> On 01/06/2017 03:34 AM, Rick Chang wrote: >>>>>> Hi Hans, >>>>>> >>>>>> The dependence on [1] has been merged in 4.10, but [2] has not.Do you have >>>>>> any idea about this patch series? Should we wait for [2] or we could merge >>>>>> the source code and dt-binding first? >>>>> >>>>> Looking at [2] I noticed that the last comment was July 4th. What is the reason >>>>> it hasn't been merged yet? >>>>> >>>>> If I know [2] will be merged for 4.11, then I am fine with merging this media >>>>> patch series. The dependency of this patch on [2] is something Mauro can handle. >>>>> >>>>> If [2] is not merged for 4.11, then I think it is better to wait until it is >>>>> merged. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I can't take [2] because there is no scpsys in the dts present. It seems >>>> that it got never posted. >>>> >>>> Rick can you please follow-up with James and provide a patch which adds >>>> a scpsys node to the mt2701.dtsi? >>>> >>> >>> James sent three MT2701 dts patches [1] two weeks ago, these three >>> patches include scpsys node. Please take a reference. And We will send >>> new MT2701 ionmmu/smi dtsi node patch base on [1] later, thus you can >>> accept and merge to 4.11. >>> >> >> Thanks for the clarification. I pulled all this patches into >> v4.10-next/dts32 >> >> Hans will you take v9 of this patch set? >> Then I'll take the dts patch. >> >> Regards, >> Matthias >> >>> [1] >>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9489991/ >>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9489985/ >>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9489989/ >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Eddie >>> >>> > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt2701.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt2701.dtsi index 8f13c70..4dd5048 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt2701.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt2701.dtsi @@ -298,6 +298,20 @@ power-domains = <&scpsys MT2701_POWER_DOMAIN_ISP>; }; + jpegdec: jpegdec@15004000 { + compatible = "mediatek,mt2701-jpgdec"; + reg = <0 0x15004000 0 0x1000>; + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 143 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>; + clocks = <&imgsys CLK_IMG_JPGDEC_SMI>, + <&imgsys CLK_IMG_JPGDEC>; + clock-names = "jpgdec-smi", + "jpgdec"; + power-domains = <&scpsys MT2701_POWER_DOMAIN_ISP>; + mediatek,larb = <&larb2>; + iommus = <&iommu MT2701_M4U_PORT_JPGDEC_WDMA>, + <&iommu MT2701_M4U_PORT_JPGDEC_BSDMA>; + }; + vdecsys: syscon@16000000 { compatible = "mediatek,mt2701-vdecsys", "syscon"; reg = <0 0x16000000 0 0x1000>;