From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:16497 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753456Ab1AJKqX (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jan 2011 05:46:23 -0500 Message-ID: <4D2AE37B.2020105@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 08:46:19 -0200 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hans de Goede CC: Hans Verkuil , Linux Media Mailing List , Jean-Francois Moine Subject: Re: RFC: Move the deprecated et61x251 and sn9c102 to staging References: <201101012053.00372.hverkuil@xs4all.nl> <4D20A908.9020705@redhat.com> <4D20C4FB.9060906@redhat.com> <201101022113.01133.hverkuil@xs4all.nl> <4D29A3D6.6060307@redhat.com> <4D2A61D9.1090807@redhat.com> <4D2ADF4C.4020709@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4D2ADF4C.4020709@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-ID: Sender: Em 10-01-2011 08:28, Hans de Goede escreveu: > Hi, > > On 01/10/2011 02:33 AM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: >> Em 09-01-2011 10:02, Hans de Goede escreveu: > > > >>> I've managed to make some time to also sort out the sn9c1xx usb ids >>> situation. I've just send a pull request which includes patches cleaning >>> things up. After this there are only 5 usb-ids left which will default to >>> sn9c102 when both are compiled in, and only 3 of those are not supported >>> by gspca. >> >> Good! >>> >>> So if we move the sn9c102 driver to staging we will loose support for >>> only 3 usb-ids. IOW I think it is time to move it to staging :) >> >> This would be a regression. >> > > Yes, although I wonder if anyone will notice. Fedora has had the sn9c102 > driver disabled for 3 releases now and I've received (and fixed) a single > bug in all that time about a cam not supported by gspca_sonixb which > was supported by sn9c102 > >>> Note I can write a patch to add untested support for these 3 to the >>> sonixb driver, given my experience with adding support for the hv7131d >>> based on the sn9c102 code, that should be doable. But it will be >>> completely untested :( >> >> I think that the better would be to add support for it at gspca, but wait for >> some feedback before considering it working. > > Well I've never seen these cams in the wild. sonixb cams with vga sensors > are quite rare because they cannot do more then 7.5-10 fps. So most cam > makers did the smart thing and went with a sonixj bridge for vga sensors. > > Anyways I'll do a gspca patch for adding support for the missing 3 models > (as time permits). And then we can ship that (and make it the default > if both are compiled in) for 1 or 2 cycles before moving the sn9c102 driver > to staging. Assuming we don't receive any negative feedback in those > 2 cycles (or manage to fix found bugs). It seems perfect to me. > > Regards, > > Hans