From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-fx0-f158.google.com ([209.85.220.158]:42572 "EHLO mail-fx0-f158.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751388AbZDCMcl (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Apr 2009 08:32:41 -0400 Received: by fxm2 with SMTP id 2so959641fxm.37 for ; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 05:32:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <49D60162.2020907@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2009 15:30:26 +0300 From: Darius Augulis MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sascha Hauer CC: Guennadi Liakhovetski , Linux Media Mailing List , paulius.zaleckas@teltonika.lt Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] Add camera (CSI) driver for MX1 References: <20090403113054.11098.67516.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20090403122939.GT23731@pengutronix.de> In-Reply-To: <20090403122939.GT23731@pengutronix.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Sascha Hauer wrote: > On Fri, Apr 03, 2009 at 02:15:34PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: >> On Fri, 3 Apr 2009, Darius Augulis wrote: >> >>> From: Paulius Zaleckas >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Darius Augulis >>> Signed-off-by: Paulius Zaleckas >> Ok, I'll just swap these two Sob's to reflect the processing chain, add a >> description like >> >> Add support for CMOS Sensor Interface on i.MX1 and i.MXL SoCs. >> >> and fix a couple of trivial conflicts, which probably appear, because you >> based your patches on an MXC tree, and not on current linux-next. >> Wondering, if it still will work then... At least it compiles. BTW, should >> it really also work with IMX? Then you might want to change this >> >> depends on VIDEO_DEV && ARCH_MX1 && SOC_CAMERA >> >> to >> >> depends on VIDEO_DEV && (ARCH_MX1 || ARCH_IMX) && SOC_CAMERA > > This shouldn't be necessary. ARCH_IMX does not have the platform part to > make use of this driver and will never get it. > >> but you can do this later, maybe, when you actually get a chance to test >> it on IMX (if you haven't done so yet). >> >> Sascha, we need your ack for the ARM part. > > I'm OK with this driver: I have never worked with FIQs though so I can't > say much to it. At least I can confirm it worked well with 2.6.28.5 kernel version. > > Sascha >