From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga05.intel.com (mga05.intel.com [192.55.52.43]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6C367C for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2023 12:50:46 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10599"; a="412517349" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.97,242,1669104000"; d="scan'208";a="412517349" Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 24 Jan 2023 04:50:45 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10599"; a="612035726" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.97,242,1669104000"; d="scan'208";a="612035726" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.54]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 24 Jan 2023 04:50:43 -0800 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1pKIl6-00ELPr-33; Tue, 24 Jan 2023 14:50:40 +0200 Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 14:50:40 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Hans de Goede Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Sakari Ailus , Tsuchiya Yuto , Yury Luneff , Nable , andrey.i.trufanov@gmail.com, Fabio Aiuto , linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH 33/57] media: atomisp: ov2680: Add test pattern control Message-ID: References: <20230123125205.622152-1-hdegoede@redhat.com> <20230123125205.622152-34-hdegoede@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-staging@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 12:27:55PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > On 1/23/23 19:46, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 01:51:41PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > >> Add a test pattern control. This is a 1:1 copy of the test pattern > >> control in the main drivers/media/i2c/ov2680.c driver. > > > > Hmm... I'm not sure I understand the trend of the changes. > > We have two drivers of the same sensor, correct? > > So, the idea is to move the AtomISP-specific one to be like > > the generic and then kill it eventually? > > The goal is to kill one eventually yes. I'm not sure which > one to kill yet though. I have actually found a whole bunch > of bugs in the main drivers/media/i2c/ov2680.c code and > given its buggy-ness I wonder if anyone is actually using it. > > I need to start an email thread about this (and a couple of > other open questions which I have), I have a bunch of notes > which I need to turn into emails for this. > > > If so, why do we add something here? > > Because I suspect that the atomisp version might eventually > be the one we want to keep (and move to drivers/media/i2c). Fine, just add a few words into cover letter. Btw, do you use `b4` tool to handle patch(es) series? It has a nice feature to handle a series as a PR. In that case the cover letter becomes a merge-commit message which is cool feature in my opinion. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko