From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mailout3.w1.samsung.com ([210.118.77.13]:34165 "EHLO mailout3.w1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753085AbbFZJgD (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jun 2015 05:36:03 -0400 Received: from eucpsbgm1.samsung.com (unknown [203.254.199.244]) by mailout3.w1.samsung.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.31.0 64bit (built May 5 2014)) with ESMTP id <0NQJ00B6KPC1LX20@mailout3.w1.samsung.com> for linux-media@vger.kernel.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 10:36:01 +0100 (BST) Message-id: <558D1CF3.9030808@samsung.com> Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 11:35:47 +0200 From: Sylwester Nawrocki MIME-version: 1.0 To: Philipp Zabel Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Pawel Osciak , Marek Szyprowski , Kyungmin Park , Steven Rostedt , Hans Verkuil , kamil@wypas.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pengutronix.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] [media] v4l2-mem2mem: set the queue owner field just as vb2_ioctl_reqbufs does References: <1435226487-24863-1-git-send-email-p.zabel@pengutronix.de> <558BFDED.1090006@samsung.com> <1435245167.3761.53.camel@pengutronix.de> <558D0D29.7060104@samsung.com> <1435309372.3761.70.camel@pengutronix.de> In-reply-to: <1435309372.3761.70.camel@pengutronix.de> Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 26/06/15 11:02, Philipp Zabel wrote: > Am Freitag, den 26.06.2015, 10:28 +0200 schrieb Sylwester Nawrocki: > [...] >>>> > >> How about modifying v4l2_m2m_ioctl_reqbufs() instead ? >>> > > >>> > > The coda, gsc-m2m, m2m-deinterlace, mx2_emmaprp, and sh_veu drivers all >>> > > have their own implementation of vidioc_reqbufs that call >>> > > v4l2_m2m_reqbufs directly. >>> > > Maybe this should be moved into v4l2_m2m_ioctl_reqbufs after all drivers >>> > > are updated to use it instead of v4l2_m2m_reqbufs. >> > >> > In case of some of the above listed drivers it shouldn't be difficult >> > and would be nice to convert to the generic v4l2_m2m_ioctl* callbacks. >> > >> > Anyway, I guess your code change makes sense, just the comment might >> > be a little bit misleading. vq->owner will always be one and the same >> > file handle, unless I'm missing something. > > True. Since the m2m_ctx containing the vb2_queue is attached to the file > handle, this will only ever get called with the same file handle for a > given queue. s/we have a new owner/we have an owner/ ? Sounds good enough to me.