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 A905E419FBC for ; Mon, 20 Jul 2026 12:46:56 +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=1784551618; cv=none; b=PVopVEYDiRIG6lsYgjytkVxCjWpajD46JjTnlan6yjRHlqBqhZgdp3YtNkhyf7/HUVXQt/cB36Sa/1/QmIof+Kgm6DSfpqIxkS4jT3iPPVglBA2koXP2uHMZl4vLJcrgx3DERxkAJDnBZ5Ca3yroxsnWeU2FhnSgtu0PHjOvKCQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784551618; c=relaxed/simple; bh=QiU+/g2UreGuHCo1KjLawpDLh+3aTzgB7h1niiC4EXQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ApkrP2rrzod+vYm7XLdu+qttfHWPzHgq6Ko43oTWh3MQsMPq9bDV84gWLRBNMOxC0twjljkmoE+UgWge7JqFDYu25qPU1GiMKzqEMjfk5KTNcYf4BMdxfsw7zM7TPBi1bHq/SOGHlcvmZPCd7NgOP/0UqzhvaEO9XdTZsysSax0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (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=SzIka2s6; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (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="SzIka2s6" Received: from killaraus.ideasonboard.com (2001-14ba-70f3-e800--a06.rev.dnainternet.fi [IPv6:2001:14ba:70f3:e800::a06]) by perceval.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 91E4F161; Mon, 20 Jul 2026 14:45:54 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ideasonboard.com; s=mail; t=1784551554; bh=QiU+/g2UreGuHCo1KjLawpDLh+3aTzgB7h1niiC4EXQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=SzIka2s67PhtiTHoW1GYKQb26ql1ZY4xPkMTQG8bHSwNKmKbEd0GZdS2pUaDAvrwX bO46KRzPKBAIZRz3ywZg5hIEw9BxNrngt/0Q7uK1Q6/DldKWkIA66R/+cgjrVP4r2f G1/in5CncrmwC/96iEmFvAJ8pdP+ZvwzEW8+v/28= Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2026 15:46:51 +0300 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Sakari Ailus Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org, hans@jjverkuil.nl, Prabhakar , Kate Hsuan , Dave Stevenson , Tommaso Merciai , Benjamin Mugnier , Sylvain Petinot , Christophe JAILLET , Julien Massot , Naushir Patuck , "Yan, Dongcheng" , Stefan Klug , Mirela Rabulea , =?utf-8?B?QW5kcsOp?= Apitzsch , Heimir Thor Sverrisson , Kieran Bingham , Mehdi Djait , Ricardo Ribalda Delgado , Hans de Goede , Jacopo Mondi , Tomi Valkeinen , David Plowman , "Yu, Ong Hock" , "Ng, Khai Wen" , Jai Luthra , Rishikesh Donadkar Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 13/16] media: v4l2-subdev: Add v4l2_subdev_call_ci_state_{active,try} Message-ID: <20260720124651.GA9442@killaraus.ideasonboard.com> References: <20260607215356.842932-1-sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> <20260701122634.1728782-13-sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> <20260720084553.GD3679@killaraus.ideasonboard.com> 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: On Mon, Jul 20, 2026 at 11:51:23AM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote: > On Mon, Jul 20, 2026 at 11:45:53AM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 01, 2026 at 03:26:30PM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > > Add v4l2_subdev_call_ci_state_active(), and > > > v4l2_subdev_call_ci_state_try() to call sub-device pad ops that > > > take struct v4l2_subdev_client_info pointer as an argument. These ops > > > cannot be called using v4l2_subdev_call_state_active() or > > > v4l2_subdev_call_state_try() as the client_info argument precedes the > > > state argument. > > > > Is there a reason why the state argument can't go first ? This patch > > then wouldn't be needed. > > The client capabilities are constant as is the sub-device itself (at least > in terms of this call) whereas the callback operates on the state, followed > by its arguments. That is a more natural order of arguments IMO. At the cost of lots of complexity when calling operations. Is it worth it ? -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart