Re: [PATCH] mt9m111: add support for mt9m112 since sensors seem identical

[Mike Rapoport <mike@compulab.co.il>]

Guennadi, Robert,

Mike Rapoport wrote:
> 
> Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
>> On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Mike Rapoport wrote:
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <mike@compulab.co.il>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/media/video/mt9m111.c |    3 ++-
>>>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/media/video/mt9m111.c b/drivers/media/video/mt9m111.c
>>> index da0b2d5..49c1167 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/media/video/mt9m111.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/media/video/mt9m111.c
>>> @@ -841,7 +841,8 @@ static int mt9m111_video_probe(struct soc_camera_device *icd)
>>>  	data = reg_read(CHIP_VERSION);
>>>  
>>>  	switch (data) {
>>> -	case 0x143a:
>>> +	case 0x143a: /* MT9M111 */
>>> +	case 0x148c: /* MT9M112 */
>>>  		mt9m111->model = V4L2_IDENT_MT9M111;
>> Wouldn't it be better to add a new chip ID? Are there any differences 
>> between the two models, that the user might want to know about?
> 
> I don't have mt9m111 datasheet, I can only judge by "feature comparison" table
> in the mt9m112 datasheet. It seems that sensors differ in there advanced image
> processing and low power mode capabilities.
> If you think it's worse adding new chip ID, I'll prepare the patches.

Any comments? Should I add a new chip ID, or modifying Kconfig and comments would
be enough?

>> Thanks
>> Guennadi
>>
>>>  		icd->formats = mt9m111_colour_formats;
>>>  		icd->num_formats = ARRAY_SIZE(mt9m111_colour_formats);
>>> -- 
>>> 1.5.6.4
>>>
>>> --
>>> video4linux-list mailing list
>>> Unsubscribe mailto:video4linux-list-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/video4linux-list
>>>
>> ---
>> Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
>> Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
>>
> 

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.

--
video4linux-list mailing list
Unsubscribe mailto:video4linux-list-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/video4linux-list