Linux Media Controller development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: jacopo mondi <jacopo@jmondi.org>
To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@kernel.org>
Cc: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>,
	linux-media@vger.kernel.org, hverkuil@xs4all.nl,
	mchehab@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] SoC camera: Remove the framework and the drivers
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2018 21:28:57 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181030202857.GH15991@w540> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181030091409.76b07620@coco.lan>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3954 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 09:14:09AM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Tue, 30 Oct 2018 01:21:34 +0200
> Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> escreveu:
>
> > The SoC camera framework has been obsolete for some time and it is no
> > longer functional. A few drivers have been converted to the V4L2
> > sub-device API but for the rest the conversion has not taken place yet.
> >
> > In order to keep the tree clean and to avoid keep maintaining
> > non-functional and obsolete code, remove the SoC camera framework as well
> > as the drivers that depend on it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > Resending, this time with git format-patch -D .
> >
> >  MAINTAINERS                                        |    8 -
> >  drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig                          |    8 -
> >  drivers/media/i2c/Makefile                         |    1 -
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/Kconfig               |   66 -
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/Makefile              |   10 -
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov9640.h              |  208 --
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_mt9m001.c         |  757 -------
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_mt9t112.c         | 1157 -----------
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_mt9v022.c         | 1012 ---------
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_ov5642.c          | 1087 ----------
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_ov772x.c          | 1123 ----------
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_ov9640.c          |  738 -------
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_ov9740.c          |  996 ---------
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_rj54n1cb0c.c      | 1415 -------------
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_tw9910.c          |  999 ---------
>
> I don't see why we should remove those. I mean, Jacopo is
> actually converting those drivers to not depend on soc_camera,
> and it is a way better to review those patches with the old
> code in place.

I have converted a few drivers used by some SH boards where I dropped
dependencies on soc_camera, not to remove camera support from those. For
others I don't have cameras to test with, nor I know about boards in
mainline using them.

From my side, driver conversion is done.

>
> So, at least while Jacopo is keep doing this work, I would keep
> at Kernel tree, as it helps to see a diff when the driver changes
> when getting rid of soc_camera dependencies.
>
> So, IMO, the best would be to move those to /staging, eventually
> depending on BROKEN.

However, somebody with a (rather old) development setup using those camera
sensor may wants to see if mainline supports them. We actually had a
few patches coming lately (for ov. I understand Sakari's argument that those
could be retrieved from git history, but a few people will notice imo.
I also understand the additional maintainership burden of keeping them
around, so I'm fine with either ways ;)

This is a list of the current situation in mainline, to have a better
idea:

$for i in `seq 1 9`; do CAM=$(head -n $i /tmp/soc_cams | tail -n 1); echo  $CAM; find drivers/media/ -name  $CAM; done
t9m001.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/mt9m001.c
mt9t112.c
drivers/media/i2c/mt9t112.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/mt9t112.c
mt9v022.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/mt9v022.c
ov5642.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov5642.c
ov772x.c
drivers/media/i2c/ov772x.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov772x.c
ov9640.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov9640.c
ov9740.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov9740.c
rj54n1cb0c.c
drivers/media/i2c/rj54n1cb0c.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/rj54n1cb0c.c
tw9910.c
drivers/media/i2c/tw9910.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/tw9910.c

So it seems to me only the following sensor do not have a
non-soc_camera driver at the moment:

mt9m001.c
mt9v022.c
ov5642.c
ov9640.c
ov9740.c

Thanks
   j

>
> Thanks,
> Mauro

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2018-10-31  5:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-10-29 23:00 [PATCH 0/4] SoC camera removal Sakari Ailus
2018-10-29 23:00 ` [PATCH 1/4] tw9910: Unregister async subdev at device unbind Sakari Ailus
2018-10-29 23:00 ` [PATCH 2/4] tw9910: No SoC camera dependency Sakari Ailus
2018-10-30 12:03   ` Hans Verkuil
2018-10-31  9:49     ` Sakari Ailus
2018-10-31  9:50       ` Hans Verkuil
2018-10-29 23:00 ` [PATCH 4/4] SoC camera: Tidy the header Sakari Ailus
2018-10-30  9:50   ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-30 12:06   ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-31  9:29     ` Sakari Ailus
2018-10-31  9:40       ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-31  9:44         ` Sakari Ailus
2018-10-31  9:57         ` Sakari Ailus
2018-10-31 10:00         ` Hans Verkuil
2018-10-31 10:54           ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-11-13 22:41             ` Sakari Ailus
2018-10-29 23:21 ` [PATCH 3/4] SoC camera: Remove the framework and the drivers Sakari Ailus
2018-10-30  9:43   ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-30 12:06     ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-30 12:09       ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-30 12:14     ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-30 20:28       ` jacopo mondi [this message]
2018-10-30 20:35         ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-30 21:17           ` jacopo mondi
2018-10-31  9:12             ` Hans Verkuil
2018-10-31  9:32           ` Sakari Ailus
2018-10-31 10:04             ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20181030202857.GH15991@w540 \
    --to=jacopo@jmondi.org \
    --cc=hverkuil@xs4all.nl \
    --cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mchehab+samsung@kernel.org \
    --cc=mchehab@kernel.org \
    --cc=sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox