Re: [PATCH 3/3] soc-camera: let camera host drivers decide upon pixel format

[Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>]

Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@gmx.de> writes:

> Hi Robert,
> As I wrote in the comment to the patch, I think, lists of pixel formats, 
> supported by sensors are rather static, therefore they can be easily 
> represented by a list of structures, that's what our ->formats are about.  
> Now, the latest patch changes the logic in a way, that this list is now 
> what a sensor offers, and not what the user gets, requests to set a format 
> are now handled by camera hosts, so they decide how to implement the 
> requested format. Now, we are almost that far. What I've forgotten about 
> and why, probably, you decided we still don't do that, is that the 
> ->formats array is still used for format enumeration. It shall not be. So, 
> I'm going to write another patch, that would move format enumeration into 
> host drivers. To do that, we will probably have to create such a list 
> _dynamically_ in .add() method based on the ->formats list _and_ host's 
> capabilities. We might use the ->host_priv link, I suggested in my 
> previous email, to hold that list. It would be even better to not have to 
> create such a list and just enumerate formats dynamically in the host 
> driver, but I am not sure how to handle the index... I'll have to think 
> about it a bit more.
>
> Does this answer your question?
Yes, absolutely. That's the right direction. I'm looking forward to see the
incremental patch, as you may guess ;) My YUV work is over, I'm just waiting for
the soc_camera patchset to stabilize to fire my own serie.

I'll try to think about the fully dynamic formats list, even if I prefer the
computed list at sensor attachment.

--
Robert

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