From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com (perceval.ideasonboard.com [213.167.242.64]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8391F67C4D; Tue, 16 Jan 2024 22:56:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705445778; cv=none; b=uXTL6z/QikC6x8rKNIC3V19jWACzebNwJafaRt8ATu5rrwZoyBP04RB6xRWr27IUITlC6tbwEHlU9SSLMBk66rEnuOSJAsImq4LPN2jqGZU3GwoCZpYWw/AvjZ8IUnCK3suzMSfzwhxibGL9iBgM9Pu7tBhIZaDHCn6vdbyXeA0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705445778; c=relaxed/simple; bh=IRwRUQdwBTS2kA8qjwAaxRwBLfowiexvmeyjaSk3fac=; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID: References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition: In-Reply-To; b=da1ciGzw0t4IZhtUI4BDtWVOtC70yBFGU7i9Sc6peViB3eHPoZNsUw/WQ3ERXC1Y7YMGh69mVwxxnlqxWtQpW5YDURf4rnAcGrfBwkXzY7XNQW3yD0bH3jmZOG0DlbRDZqWVtGa2dFD3XtPv8iVQqtb0rfhN9BwA83g0Ac6fe5Q= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b=NnL9SKcT; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b="NnL9SKcT" Received: from pendragon.ideasonboard.com (89-27-53-110.bb.dnainternet.fi [89.27.53.110]) by perceval.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5940BB2A; Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:55:05 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ideasonboard.com; s=mail; t=1705445705; bh=IRwRUQdwBTS2kA8qjwAaxRwBLfowiexvmeyjaSk3fac=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=NnL9SKcTkKobGkyR4WrheJwAIF15Z4nZEsqjsFLRxFWVxBUKsxefLH5JFUzkPGQgt 4HvyShIWtSuWBFIDB5IWl2PiUl9+LS3H6H19sop54T90O9ZvHdfi/0HaxT7vVpYgNj nu6PPj81LJq5XhAMDtsqoCSPbB5dESMZa2f3qK2M= Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:56:18 +0200 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Sakari Ailus Cc: Jacopo Mondi , Vinay Varma , Dave Stevenson , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , "open list:SONY IMX219 SENSOR DRIVER" , open list Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: i2c: imx219: implement the v4l2 selection api Message-ID: <20240116225618.GA4860@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> References: <3q6andka2su7i43xz2ok44ejvtb3hdjdn6xretyde7sdcvtd7l@lz2syngckivi> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-media@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Hello, On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 07:09:59PM +0000, Sakari Ailus wrote: > On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 10:19:35AM +0100, Jacopo Mondi wrote: > > Hi Sakari, Vinay, > > > > a more foundamental question is how this usage of the crop/compose > > API plays with the fact we enumerate only a limited set of frame > > sizes, and now you can get an arbitrary output size. We could get away > > by modifying enum_frame_sizes to return a size range (or ranges) but I > > wonder if it wouldn't be better to introduce an internal pad to > > represent the pixel array where to apply TGT_CROP in combination with > > a source pad where we could apply TGT_COMPOSE and an output format. I'm working on patches that implement an internal image pad, as part of the work to add embedded data support. I hope to post this in the near future. > My earlier review wasn't focussed on the interface at all... > > To depart from the current restrictions on single-subdev sensor drivers, > this is one option. > > Sensors implement various steps in different orders and different drivers > have different capabilities, too. Mainly there are two classes: freely > configurable drivers such cas CCS and then register list based drivers > where virtually any dependencies between configurations are possible. > > We probably can't support both classes with the same API semantics and due > to hardware differencies. The sensor UAPI will be less than uniform it has > been in the past but I don't think this should be an issue. > > I wonder how much common understanding we have at this point on how this > API would look like. Probably not much? -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart