Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752099AbdFPGXG (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Jun 2017 02:23:06 -0400 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:56707 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751079AbdFPGXF (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Jun 2017 02:23:05 -0400 Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 08:23:02 +0200 From: Pavel Machek To: Sakari Ailus Cc: Laurent Pinchart , mchehab@kernel.org, kernel list , ivo.g.dimitrov.75@gmail.com, sre@kernel.org, pali.rohar@gmail.com, linux-media@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: v4l2-fwnode: status, plans for merge, any branch to merge against? Message-ID: <20170616062302.GA455@amd> References: <20170302123848.GA28230@amd> <20170304130318.GU3220@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> <20170306072323.GA23509@amd> <20170310225418.GJ3220@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> <20170613122240.GA2803@amd> <20170613124748.GD12407@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> <20170613210900.GA31456@amd> <20170614110634.GP12407@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> <20170614194128.GA5669@amd> <20170615220659.GG12407@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="u3/rZRmxL6MmkK24" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170615220659.GG12407@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2259 Lines: 67 --u3/rZRmxL6MmkK24 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri 2017-06-16 01:07:00, Sakari Ailus wrote: > On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 09:41:29PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/omap3isp/isp.c b/drivers/media/plat= form/omap3isp/isp.c > > index 4ca3fc9..b80debf 100644 > > --- a/drivers/media/platform/omap3isp/isp.c > > +++ b/drivers/media/platform/omap3isp/isp.c > > @@ -2026,7 +2026,7 @@ static int isp_fwnode_parse(struct device *dev, s= truct fwnode_handle *fwnode, > > =20 > > isd->bus =3D buscfg; > > =20 > > - ret =3D v4l2_fwnode_endpoint_parse(fwn, vep); > > + ret =3D v4l2_fwnode_endpoint_parse(fwnode, &vep); > > if (ret) > > return ret; >=20 > I just pushed the fix there. >=20 > Btw. I think we should probably drop the change allocating the sub-device > configuration separately. It's better to associate the lens, flash and > eeprom (where it exists) to the sensor than to the CSI-2 receiver. In that > case there are no async sub-devices without bus configuration. Actually I thought about that a bit, and am not sure about that. CSI-2 receiver may not be good place to associate lens and flash with, agreed. But is sensor a good place? In particular, phones with two cameras cooperating (for example one black&white and one color) are getting common. It seems to be true that each sensor has a lens and autofocus motor associated, but flash LED is common, and both sensors are designed to work as one device. But yes, that's still better than placing it at CSI-2 receiver. But I guess we should make sure that flash LED can associated with more than one sensor, and maybe we should have some kind of "camera package" entity. Best regards, Pavel --=20 (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blo= g.html --u3/rZRmxL6MmkK24 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAllDeUYACgkQMOfwapXb+vLFkQCgpXPopzquW18X15vpmKrAlVkP SSMAoKrFbHIuw8jgVUxiIKvullef4Eoi =cwdS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --u3/rZRmxL6MmkK24--