Re: [PATCH v3 04/33] v4l: VIDIOC_SUBDEV_S_SELECTION and VIDIOC_SUBDEV_G_SELECTION IOCTLs

Sakari Ailus
2012-02-27T00:57:52Z

Hi Laurent,

On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 01:22:34AM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Sakari,
>
> On Thursday 23 February 2012 08:01:23 Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > >> +/* active cropping area */
> > >> +#define V4L2_SUBDEV_SEL_TGT_CROP_ACTIVE 0x0000
> > >> +/* cropping bounds */
> > >> +#define V4L2_SUBDEV_SEL_TGT_CROP_BOUNDS 0x0002
> > >> +/* current composing area */
> > >> +#define V4L2_SUBDEV_SEL_TGT_COMPOSE_ACTIVE 0x0100
> > >> +/* composing bounds */
> > >
> > > I'm not sure if ACTIVE is a good name here. It sounds confusing as we
> > > already have V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_ACTIVE.
> >
> > We are using V4L2_SEL_TGT_COMPOSE_ACTIVE on V4L2 nodes already --- the
> > name I'm using here just mirrors the naming on V4L2 device nodes. If I
> > choose a different name here, some of that analogy is lost.
> >
> > That said, I'm not against changing this but the equivalent change
> > should then be made on V4L2 selection API for consistency.
>
> I'm not against changing the V4L2 selection API either :-) Just think about
> developers talking about "try crop active" or "active crop bounds". Even
> worse, will "active crop" refer to the active target or the active "which" ?
> That will be very confusing.

I think I understand your concern. An easy solution would be to rename
active targets to something else, but what would that be exactly?

Also I can't currently think non-active rectangles would have use with which
== try as they're not (typically) changeable. I guess this doesn't matter in
resolving the issue.

Current?
Effective?
Real?
Brisk?

Cheers,

--
Sakari Ailus
e-mail: sakari.ailus@iki.fi jabber/XMPP/Gmail: sailus@retiisi.org.uk