From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans de Goede Subject: Re: [RFC] How to pass camera Orientation to userspace Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 23:54:42 +0100 Message-ID: <49A1D7B2.5070601@redhat.com> References: <200902180030.52729.linux@baker-net.org.uk> <200902211253.58061.hverkuil@xs4all.nl> <49A13466.5080605@redhat.com> <49A1A03A.8080303@redhat.com> <49A1CA5B.5000407@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:44939 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753505AbZBVW4h (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Feb 2009 17:56:37 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Trent Piepho Cc: kilgota@banach.math.auburn.edu, Hans Verkuil , Adam Baker , linux-media@vger.kernel.org, Jean-Francois Moine , Olivier Lorin , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org Trent Piepho wrote: > On Sun, 22 Feb 2009, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Yes that is what we are talking about, the camera having a gravity switch >> (usually nothing as advanced as a gyroscope). Also the bits we are talking >> about are in a struct which communicates information one way, from the camera >> to userspace, so there is no way to clear the bits to make the camera do something. > > First, I'd like to say I agree with most that the installed orientation of > the camera sensor really is a different concept than the current value of a > gravity sensor. It's not necessary, and maybe not even desirable, to > handle them in the same way. > > I do not see the advantage of using reserved bits instead of controls. > > The are a limited number of reserved bits. In some structures there are > only a few left. They will run out. Then what? Packing non-standard > sensor attributes and camera sensor meta-data into a few reserved bits is > not a sustainable policy. > > Controls on the other card are not limited and won't run out. > Yes but these things are *not* controls, end of discussion. The control API is for controls, not to stuff all kind of cruft in. Regards, Hans