From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-ee0-f47.google.com ([74.125.83.47]:42318 "EHLO mail-ee0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758708Ab3CYVuJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Mar 2013 17:50:09 -0400 Received: by mail-ee0-f47.google.com with SMTP id t10so466402eei.34 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2013 14:50:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5150C68D.80109@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 22:50:05 +0100 From: Sylwester Nawrocki MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab CC: LMML , Jarod Wilson , =?UTF-8?B?RGF2aWQgSMOkcmRlbWFu?= , Ravi Kumar V , Manu Abraham , Antti Palosaari , Laurent Pinchart , Sylwester Nawrocki , Guennadi Liakhovetski , Prabhakar Lad , Marek Szyprowski , Hans Verkuil , Michael Krufky Subject: Re: Status of the patches under review at LMML (32 patches) References: <20130324151111.1b2ca8d4@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20130324151111.1b2ca8d4@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 03/24/2013 07:11 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > This is the summary of the patches that are currently under review at > Linux Media Mailing List. > Each patch is represented by its submission date, the subject (up to 70 > chars) and the patchwork link (if submitted via email). > > P.S.: This email is c/c to the developers where some action is expected. > If you were copied, please review the patches, acking/nacking or > submitting an update. > > It took me a lot of time to handle patches this time. The good news is that > there's just one patch without an owner. > > This patch is there on the pile for a long time. I was actually expecting > that either Jarod or David could review it, as it can affect existing > NEC devices: [...] > == Sylwester Nawrocki == > > Jan, 6 2013: s5p-tv: mixer: fix handling of VIDIOC_S_FMT http://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/16143 Tomasz Stanislawski From my side I can't see any applications this patch could cause issues to. And it actually breaks some applications to not have this patch applied. Hence we keep it applied internally. I will likely not be able to address the issue at V4L2 API that some applications rely on drivers returning -EINVAL on an attempt to set unsupported format. I don't have an idea what to do with that at the moment :) I would say it is safe to apply this patch. But if you have concerns please ignore it. Or let's leave it in current state. Regards, Sylwester