From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com ([95.142.166.194]:37969 "EHLO perceval.ideasonboard.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756267Ab1GDNWH (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jul 2011 09:22:07 -0400 From: Laurent Pinchart To: "Hadli, Manjunath" Subject: Re: [ RFC PATCH 0/8] RFC for Media Controller capture driver for DM365 Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2011 15:22:37 +0200 Cc: "'Sakari Ailus'" , LMML , dlos References: <1309439597-15998-1-git-send-email-manjunath.hadli@ti.com> <20110630135736.GK12671@valkosipuli.localdomain> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201107041522.37437.laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> List-ID: Sender: Hi Manjunath, On Monday 04 July 2011 07:58:06 Hadli, Manjunath wrote: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 19:27:36, Sakari Ailus wrote: [snip] > > I understand that not all the blocks are there. Are there any major > > functional differences between those in Davinci and those in OMAP 3? > > Could the OMAP 3 ISP driver made support Davinci ISP as well? > > Yes, there are a lot of major differences between OMAP3 and Dm365/Dm355, > both in terms of features, there IP, and the software interface, including > all the registers which are entirely different. The closest omap3 would > come to is only to DM6446. I do not think OMAP3 driver can be made to > support Dm355 and Dm365. It is good to keep the OMAP3 neat and clean to > cater for OMAP4 and beyond, and keep the Davinci family separate. The > names might look similar and hence confusing for you, but the names can as > well be made the same as Dm365 blocks like ISIF and IPIPE and IPIPEIF > which are different. The DM6446 ISP is very similar to the OMAP3 ISP, and thus quite different from the DM355/365 ISPs. Should the DM6446 be supported by the OMAP3 ISP driver, and the DM355/365 by this driver ? > > There are number of possible improvements that still should be made to > > the OMAP 3 ISP driver so this way both of the driver would easily get > > them. To mention some: > > > > - Multiple output pipeline > > - Switch to videobuf2 > > - Switch to GENIRQ > > Sure. There is definitely a design element convergence, and overtime I > think some of these would get into the core v4l2 infrastructure. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart