From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com ([95.142.166.194]:39624 "EHLO perceval.ideasonboard.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752690Ab2CBSFV (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Mar 2012 13:05:21 -0500 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Sakari Ailus Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org, Kruno Mrak Subject: Re: [PATCH] omap3isp: Fix frame number propagation Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2012 19:05:38 +0100 Message-ID: <5501569.eNOdF1POb9@avalon> In-Reply-To: <20120302175858.GE15695@valkosipuli.localdomain> References: <1330685342-15139-1-git-send-email-laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> <20120302175858.GE15695@valkosipuli.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Sakari, On Friday 02 March 2012 19:58:59 Sakari Ailus wrote: > On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 11:49:02AM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > When propagating the frame number through the pipeline, the frame number > > must be incremented at frame start by the appropriate IRQ handler. This > > was properly handled for the CSI2 and CCP2 receivers, but not when the > > CCDC parallel interface is used. > > > > ADD frame number incrementation to the HS/VS interrupt handler. As the > > HS/VS interrupt is also generated for frames received by the CSI2 and > > CCP2 receivers, remove explicit propagation handling from the serial > > receivers. > > > > Reported-by: Kruno Mrak > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart > > --- > > > > drivers/media/video/omap3isp/isp.c | 8 -------- > > drivers/media/video/omap3isp/ispccdc.c | 3 +++ > > drivers/media/video/omap3isp/ispccp2.c | 23 ----------------------- > > drivers/media/video/omap3isp/ispcsi2.c | 20 +++----------------- > > drivers/media/video/omap3isp/ispcsi2.h | 1 - > > 5 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-) > > Thanks for the patch, Laurent! > > Also, this patch simplifies frame numbering a lot. > > Acked-by: Sakari Ailus > Tested-by: Sakari Ailus > > Using CSI-2 receiver writing straight to memory, that is. > > There's a slight dependency to my patches; are you going to submit this > first or how shall we proceed? No conflicts but there's some fuzz > nonetheless. I'd like to submit the patch for v3.4. If your patch set is ready for v3.4 as well, we can push both through the same tree. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart