Re: Please test the gspca-stv06xx branch

[Chia-I Wu <olvaffe@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 07:23:19PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Exactly, so the functions belong in the bridge code, and if those 
> functions are properly written and prototyped, then they should be 
> directly usable from the sensor without requiring convoluting macros 
> around them. The only reason and acceptable use I see for using macro's 
> here would be to simplify the error handling as is currently done in the 
> other 2 sensor code files.
Each sensor could have a slightly different way to access the registers.
The bridge is responsible to provide means to ease the work needed in
the sensor drivers.

When 046d:0850 tries to write to its registers, it could

* have a wrapper which calls the helper function _AND_ write to reg
  0x1704 of the bridge (the extra packet).  Or,
* simply call the helper function.  The helper function checks the
  product id and send a second control message automatically.

I see the logics belong to the sensor driver and prefer the first
method, while you might see the second method easier to use.

My point is, a wrapper is not a big *NO*.  Instead, it is a good
practice, even if there is no sensor-specific logics involved.
> I greatly appreciate your efforts, but please try to constrain yourself 
> the programming model / pragma's followed through out gspca.
I would like to rebase the patch against current tip, or your changes
once they are merged.

-- 
Regards,
olv

--
video4linux-list mailing list
Unsubscribe mailto:video4linux-list-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/video4linux-list