Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Media Controller capture driver for DM365

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@redhat.com>]

Em Wed, 28 Nov 2012 12:56:10 +0100
Hans Verkuil <hansverk@cisco.com> escreveu:

> On Wed 28 November 2012 12:45:37 Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > I wish people wouldn't submit big patches right before the merge
> > window opens...  :/ It's better to let it sit in linux-next for a
> > couple weeks so people can mess with it a bit.
> 
> It's been under review for quite some time now, and the main change since
> the last posted version is that this is now moved to staging/media.
> 
> So it is not yet ready for prime time, but we do want it in to simplify
> the last remaining improvements needed to move it to drivers/media.

"last remaining improvements"? I didn't review the patchset, but
the TODO list seems to have several pending stuff there:

+- User space interface refinement
+        - Controls should be used when possible rather than private ioctl
+        - No enums should be used
+        - Use of MC and V4L2 subdev APIs when applicable
+        - Single interface header might suffice
+        - Current interface forces to configure everything at once
+- Get rid of the dm365_ipipe_hw.[ch] layer
+- Active external sub-devices defined by link configuration; no strcmp
+  needed
+- More generic platform data (i2c adapters)
+- The driver should have no knowledge of possible external subdevs; see
+  struct vpfe_subdev_id
+- Some of the hardware control should be refactorede
+- Check proper serialisation (through mutexes and spinlocks)
+- Names that are visible in kernel global namespace should have a common
+  prefix (or a few)

>From the above comments, both Kernelspace and Userspace APIs require 
lots of work.

Also, it is not clear at all if this is a fork of the existing davinci
driver, or if it is a completely new driver for an already-supported
hardware, making very hard (if not impossible) to review it, and, if it
is yet-another-driver for the same hardware, moving it out of staging
will be a big issue, as it won't be trivial to check for regressions
introduced by a different driver.

> 
> I'm happy with this going in given the circumstances.

Well, I'm not.

-- 
Regards,
Mauro