From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-ww0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:55682 "EHLO mail-ww0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753400Ab0IEIE3 (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Sep 2010 04:04:29 -0400 Received: by wwj40 with SMTP id 40so4956139wwj.1 for ; Sun, 05 Sep 2010 01:04:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Peter Korsgaard To: Hans de Goede Cc: Jean-Francois Moine , linux-media@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] LED control References: <20100904131048.6ca207d1@tele> <4C834D46.5030801@redhat.com> Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2010 10:04:25 +0200 In-Reply-To: <4C834D46.5030801@redhat.com> (Hans de Goede's message of "Sun, 05 Sep 2010 09:56:54 +0200") Message-ID: <87sk1oty46.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-ID: Sender: Mauro Carvalho Chehab >>>>> "Hans" == Hans de Goede writes: Hi, >> + V4L2_CID_LEDS >> + integer >> + Switch on or off the LED(s) or illuminator(s) of the device. >> + The control type and values depend on the driver and may be either >> + a single boolean (0: off, 1:on) or the index in a menu type. >> + Hans> I think that using one control for both status leds (which is Hans> what we are usually talking about) and illuminator(s) is a bad Hans> idea. I'm fine with standardizing these, but can we please have 2 Hans> CID's one for status lights and one for the led. Esp, as I can Hans> easily see us supporting a microscope in the future where the Hans> microscope itself or other devices with the same bridge will have Hans> a status led, so then we will need 2 separate controls anyways. Why does this need to go through the v4l2 api and not just use the standard LED (sysfs) api in the first place? -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard