Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752388AbeACPth (ORCPT + 1 other); Wed, 3 Jan 2018 10:49:37 -0500 Received: from galahad.ideasonboard.com ([185.26.127.97]:60373 "EHLO galahad.ideasonboard.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751422AbeACPte (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jan 2018 10:49:34 -0500 From: Laurent Pinchart To: jacopo mondi Cc: Jacopo Mondi , magnus.damm@gmail.com, geert@glider.be, mchehab@kernel.org, hverkuil@xs4all.nl, robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] media: i2c: ov772x: Remove soc_camera dependencies Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2018 17:49:55 +0200 Message-ID: <2597640.1dqQloDucb@avalon> Organization: Ideas on Board Oy In-Reply-To: <20180103154458.GD9493@w540> References: <1514469681-15602-1-git-send-email-jacopo+renesas@jmondi.org> <5703631.yJ335LfYLI@avalon> <20180103154458.GD9493@w540> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Hi Jacopo, On Wednesday, 3 January 2018 17:44:58 EET jacopo mondi wrote: > On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 05:44:03PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Thursday, 28 December 2017 16:01:19 EET Jacopo Mondi wrote: > >> Remove soc_camera framework dependencies from ov772x sensor driver. > >> - Handle clock and gpios > >> - Register async subdevice > >> - Remove soc_camera specific g/s_mbus_config operations > >> - Change image format colorspace to SRGB > > > > Could you explain the rationale for this ? > > Hans suggested this, and I assume it is beacause COLORSPACE_JPEG == > (COLORSPACE_SRGB + assumptions on quantization ranges) which does not > apply to the sensor. Could you capture it in the commit message ? :-) > >> - Remove sizes crop from get_selection as driver can't scale > >> - Add kernel doc to driver interface header file > >> - Adjust build system > > > > That's a lot for a single patch. On the other hand I don't think splitting > > this in 7 patches would be a good idea either. If you can find a better > > granularity, go for it, otherwise keep it as-is. Same comment for the > > tw9910 driver. > > I know. > I would have kept changes down to the minimum required to remove > soc_camera dependencies, but I received comments on other parts of the > driver not directly soc_camera specific. I understand this, since I'm > touching the driver it is maybe worth changing some parts of it that > needs updates.. > > >> This commit does not remove the original soc_camera based driver as long > >> as other platforms depends on soc_camera-based CEU driver. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi > >> --- > >> > >> drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig | 11 +++ > >> drivers/media/i2c/Makefile | 1 + > >> drivers/media/i2c/ov772x.c | 169 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- > >> include/media/i2c/ov772x.h | 8 ++- > >> 4 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 59 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig b/drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig > >> index cb5d7ff..a61d7f4 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig > >> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig > > > > [snip] > > > >> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/ov772x.c b/drivers/media/i2c/ov772x.c > >> index 8063835..f7b293f 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/ov772x.c > >> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/ov772x.c > >> @@ -1,6 +1,9 @@ > > > > [snip] > > > >> @@ -25,8 +26,8 @@ > >> > >> #include > >> > >> #include > > > > > > -#include > > > -#include > > > + > > > +#include > > > > > > #include > > > > I think C comes before D. > > > > > #include > > > #include > > > > [snip] > > > >> @@ -650,13 +653,63 @@ static int ov772x_s_register(struct v4l2_subdev > >> *sd, > >> } > >> #endif > >> > >> +static int ov772x_power_on(struct ov772x_priv *priv) > >> +{ > >> + struct i2c_client *client = v4l2_get_subdevdata(&priv->subdev); > >> + int ret; > >> + > >> + if (priv->info->xclk_rate) > >> + ret = clk_set_rate(priv->clk, priv->info->xclk_rate); > > > > The return value is then ignored. > > > > I wonder whether the clk_set_rate() call shouldn't be kept in board code > > as it's a board-specific frequency. DT platforms would use the > > assigned-clock-rates property that doesn't require any explicit handling > > in the driver. > > DT based platforms won't have any info->xlkc_rate, so they should be > fine. I wonder how could I set rate in board code, as I'm just > registering an alias for the clock there... Exactly as done by the current code, get the clock and set the rate :) You can do that at initialization time, when you register the alias. Don't forget to put the clock too. > >> + if (priv->clk) { > >> + ret = clk_prepare_enable(priv->clk); > >> + if (ret) > >> + return ret; > >> + } > >> + > >> + if (priv->pwdn_gpio) { > >> + gpiod_set_value(priv->pwdn_gpio, 1); > >> + usleep_range(500, 1000); > >> + } > >> + > >> + /* Reset GPIOs are shared in some platforms. */ > > > > I'd make this a FIXME comment as this is really a hack. > > > > /* > > * FIXME: The reset signal is connected to a shared GPIO on some > > * platforms (namely the SuperH Migo-R). Until a framework becomes > > * available to handle this cleanly, request the GPIO temporarily > > * only to avoid conflicts. > > */ > > > > Same for the tw9910 driver. > > Ack. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart