Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753439AbYLAOYr (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2008 09:24:47 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752551AbYLAOYi (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2008 09:24:38 -0500 Received: from mailrelay005.isp.belgacom.be ([195.238.6.171]:64802 "EHLO mailrelay005.isp.belgacom.be" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752340AbYLAOYh (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2008 09:24:37 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiEFAF+BM0nCTsYx/2dsb2JhbACBbc1Rgn0 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Hans Verkuil Subject: Re: [PULL] http://www.linuxtv.org/hg/~hverkuil/v4l-dvb-ng Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 15:24:43 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: video4linux-list@redhat.com, "v4l-dvb maintainer list" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davinci-linux-open-source-bounces@linux.davincidsp.com, Mauro Carvalho Chehab References: <200812011246.08885.hverkuil@xs4all.nl> <200812011429.54019.laurent.pinchart@skynet.be> <200812011445.50115.hverkuil@xs4all.nl> In-Reply-To: <200812011445.50115.hverkuil@xs4all.nl> X-Face: 4Mf^tnii7k\_EnR5aobBm6Di[DZ9@AX1wJ"okBdX-UoJ>:SRn]c6DDU"qUIwfs98vF>=?utf-8?q?Tnf=0A=09SacR=7B?=(0Du"N%_.#X]"TXx)A'gKB1i7SK$CTLuy{h})c=g:'w3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200812011524.43499.laurent.pinchart@skynet.be> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 5300 Lines: 117 Hi Hans, On Monday 01 December 2008, Hans Verkuil wrote: > On Monday 01 December 2008 14:29:53 Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Monday 01 December 2008, Hans Verkuil wrote: > > > On Monday 01 December 2008 13:31:25 Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > > On Monday 01 December 2008, Hans Verkuil wrote: > > > > > Hi Mauro, > > > > > > > > > > Please pull from http://www.linuxtv.org/hg/~hverkuil/v4l-dvb-ng > > > > > for the following: > > > > > > > > > > - v4l2: add v4l2_device and v4l2_subdev structs to the v4l2 > > > > > framework. - v4l2-common: add i2c helper functions > > > > > - cs53l32a: convert to v4l2_subdev. > > > > > - cx25840: convert to v4l2_subdev. > > > > > - m52790: convert to v4l2_subdev. > > > > > - msp3400: convert to v4l2_subdev. > > > > > - saa7115: convert to v4l2_subdev. > > > > > - saa7127: convert to v4l2_subdev. > > > > > - saa717x: convert to v4l2_subdev. > > > > > - tuner: convert to v4l2_subdev. > > > > > - upd64031a: convert to v4l2_subdev. > > > > > - upd64083: convert to v4l2_subdev. > > > > > - vp27smpx: convert to v4l2_subdev. > > > > > - wm8739: convert to v4l2_subdev. > > > > > - wm8775: convert to v4l2_subdev. > > > > > - ivtv/ivtvfb: convert to v4l2_device/v4l2_subdev. > > > > > > > > > > All points raised in reviews are addressed so I think it is > > > > > time to get this merged so people can start to use it. > > > > > > > > Does linuxtv.org and Mercurial provide the necessary > > > > infrastructure to integrate those changes into the v4l-dvb > > > > repository while not pushing them upstream yet ? I'd like to see > > > > more people testing (and breaking and fixing :-)) your changes > > > > before they reach the mainline kernel. > > > > > > That's basically why I want this to go into the v4l-dvb repository: > > > this makes it easier for people to start working with it. It > > > doesn't affect existing drivers, except for the i2c driver changes > > > and those changes are just transforming a big switch to a set of > > > functions. So I really consider this a pretty low-risk merge. > > > > > > If someone is willing to do some testing with my tree in the next > > > two weeks then I don't mind waiting, but it's been in development > > > now from early September (if not earlier) and been reviewed several > > > times. In addition, ivtv has been modified to work with it and that > > > driver uses more sub-devices by far than any other driver. > > > > > > I don't know what more I can do, to be honest. > > > > I am all for pushing the changes to the v4l-dvb repository so they > > can get broader testing. I am, however, a bit more concerned about > > pushing the changes to Linus yet. > > They will of course go to linux-next and end up in 2.6.29 when the merge > window opens. It's obviously not for 2.6.28. I would say 2.6.29 is a bit early, but I can live with that. > > Shouldn't it wait until you convert > > other drivers and make the v4l2_device (infra)structure more > > powerful, as you announced you would ? There will probably be API/ABI > > breakage then, it patches will probably benefit from a few iterations > > in v4l-dvb before we push them to mainline. > > Yes, I want to add more features to them, but those additions need a lot > more thought. Currently the new subdev support is the most important > feature of this and the reason is the introduction of v4l2-int-device > and soc-camera: both are recent arrivals and neither was reviewed > properly. As a result we now see i2c drivers arriving that can only > work with v4l2-int-device or with soc-camera infrastructure. This is > very undesirable and must be fixed asap. Agreed. > And v4l2_subdev is the way to do this. Existing i2c drivers are not affected > and when these changes are in we can start to replace v4l2-int-device.h and > to modify soc-camera to use v4l2_subdev as well. Ok. > In addition, these changes make it easier as well to use the new i2c API > in bridge drivers (in 2.6.29 the old-style I2C probing will be > deprecated, so we need to convert). So we get many benefits with just > these changes. > Of course, I want to add more v4l2 framework support to these new > structures, but I don't have any code yet for that anyway, just lots of > ideas. Start simple, then expand. > > > I don't know if that's possible at all, or if all changes in v4l-dvb > > are automatically selected for a push to the git repository whenever > > Mauro triggers the hg->git process. > > Well, they go to linux-next, but is that a problem? In a few months time (probably even earlier) the v4l2_device structure will be reworked (and possible renamed). I'm fine with it going to linux-next now if we agree on the following. - We should only advocate v4l2_device usage for subdevices-aware video devices. Porting all drivers to v4l2_device is currently pointless and will only make future transitions more difficult. - v4l2_device should be marked as experimental. I don't want to hear any API/ABI breakage argument in a few months time when the framework will evolve. Best regards, Laurent Pinchart -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/