All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: jacopo mondi <jacopo@jmondi.org>
To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@kernel.org>
Cc: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>,
	linux-media@vger.kernel.org, hverkuil@xs4all.nl,
	mchehab@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] SoC camera: Remove the framework and the drivers
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2018 21:28:57 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181030202857.GH15991@w540> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181030091409.76b07620@coco.lan>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3954 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 09:14:09AM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Tue, 30 Oct 2018 01:21:34 +0200
> Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> escreveu:
>
> > The SoC camera framework has been obsolete for some time and it is no
> > longer functional. A few drivers have been converted to the V4L2
> > sub-device API but for the rest the conversion has not taken place yet.
> >
> > In order to keep the tree clean and to avoid keep maintaining
> > non-functional and obsolete code, remove the SoC camera framework as well
> > as the drivers that depend on it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > Resending, this time with git format-patch -D .
> >
> >  MAINTAINERS                                        |    8 -
> >  drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig                          |    8 -
> >  drivers/media/i2c/Makefile                         |    1 -
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/Kconfig               |   66 -
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/Makefile              |   10 -
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov9640.h              |  208 --
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_mt9m001.c         |  757 -------
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_mt9t112.c         | 1157 -----------
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_mt9v022.c         | 1012 ---------
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_ov5642.c          | 1087 ----------
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_ov772x.c          | 1123 ----------
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_ov9640.c          |  738 -------
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_ov9740.c          |  996 ---------
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_rj54n1cb0c.c      | 1415 -------------
> >  drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/soc_tw9910.c          |  999 ---------
>
> I don't see why we should remove those. I mean, Jacopo is
> actually converting those drivers to not depend on soc_camera,
> and it is a way better to review those patches with the old
> code in place.

I have converted a few drivers used by some SH boards where I dropped
dependencies on soc_camera, not to remove camera support from those. For
others I don't have cameras to test with, nor I know about boards in
mainline using them.

From my side, driver conversion is done.

>
> So, at least while Jacopo is keep doing this work, I would keep
> at Kernel tree, as it helps to see a diff when the driver changes
> when getting rid of soc_camera dependencies.
>
> So, IMO, the best would be to move those to /staging, eventually
> depending on BROKEN.

However, somebody with a (rather old) development setup using those camera
sensor may wants to see if mainline supports them. We actually had a
few patches coming lately (for ov. I understand Sakari's argument that those
could be retrieved from git history, but a few people will notice imo.
I also understand the additional maintainership burden of keeping them
around, so I'm fine with either ways ;)

This is a list of the current situation in mainline, to have a better
idea:

$for i in `seq 1 9`; do CAM=$(head -n $i /tmp/soc_cams | tail -n 1); echo  $CAM; find drivers/media/ -name  $CAM; done
t9m001.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/mt9m001.c
mt9t112.c
drivers/media/i2c/mt9t112.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/mt9t112.c
mt9v022.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/mt9v022.c
ov5642.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov5642.c
ov772x.c
drivers/media/i2c/ov772x.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov772x.c
ov9640.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov9640.c
ov9740.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov9740.c
rj54n1cb0c.c
drivers/media/i2c/rj54n1cb0c.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/rj54n1cb0c.c
tw9910.c
drivers/media/i2c/tw9910.c
drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/tw9910.c

So it seems to me only the following sensor do not have a
non-soc_camera driver at the moment:

mt9m001.c
mt9v022.c
ov5642.c
ov9640.c
ov9740.c

Thanks
   j

>
> Thanks,
> Mauro

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2018-10-31  5:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-10-29 23:00 [PATCH 0/4] SoC camera removal Sakari Ailus
2018-10-29 23:00 ` [PATCH 1/4] tw9910: Unregister async subdev at device unbind Sakari Ailus
2018-10-29 23:00 ` [PATCH 2/4] tw9910: No SoC camera dependency Sakari Ailus
2018-10-30 12:03   ` Hans Verkuil
2018-10-31  9:49     ` Sakari Ailus
2018-10-31  9:50       ` Hans Verkuil
2018-10-29 23:00 ` [PATCH 4/4] SoC camera: Tidy the header Sakari Ailus
2018-10-30  9:50   ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-30 12:06   ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-31  9:29     ` Sakari Ailus
2018-10-31  9:40       ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-31  9:44         ` Sakari Ailus
2018-10-31  9:57         ` Sakari Ailus
2018-10-31 10:00         ` Hans Verkuil
2018-10-31 10:54           ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-11-13 22:41             ` Sakari Ailus
2018-10-29 23:21 ` [PATCH 3/4] SoC camera: Remove the framework and the drivers Sakari Ailus
2018-10-30  9:43   ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-30 12:06     ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-30 12:09       ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-30 12:14     ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-30 20:28       ` jacopo mondi [this message]
2018-10-30 20:35         ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-10-30 21:17           ` jacopo mondi
2018-10-31  9:12             ` Hans Verkuil
2018-10-31  9:32           ` Sakari Ailus
2018-10-31 10:04             ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20181030202857.GH15991@w540 \
    --to=jacopo@jmondi.org \
    --cc=hverkuil@xs4all.nl \
    --cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mchehab+samsung@kernel.org \
    --cc=mchehab@kernel.org \
    --cc=sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.