From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from lb1-smtp-cloud2.xs4all.net ([194.109.24.21]:41832 "EHLO lb1-smtp-cloud2.xs4all.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755498AbdABOqF (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jan 2017 09:46:05 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/21] Basic i.MX IPUv3 capture support To: Jean-Michel Hautbois , Steve Longerbeam References: <1476466481-24030-1-git-send-email-p.zabel@pengutronix.de> <20161019213026.GU9460@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> <20161229205113.j6wn7kmhkfrtuayu@pengutronix.de> <7350daac-14ee-74cc-4b01-470a375613a3@denx.de> Cc: Marek Vasut , Robert Schwebel , Sakari Ailus , Gary Bisson , Sascha Hauer , Philipp Zabel , Linux Media Mailing List From: Hans Verkuil Message-ID: <3b8ed13c-a23e-dc2b-0e31-1288ea3f562a@xs4all.nl> Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2017 15:45:58 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 01/02/17 14:51, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote: > Hi, > > 2016-12-30 21:26 GMT+01:00 Steve Longerbeam : >> >> >> On 12/30/2016 11:06 AM, Marek Vasut wrote: >>> >>> On 12/29/2016 09:51 PM, Robert Schwebel wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Jean-Michel, >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 04:08:33PM +0100, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote: >>>>> >>>>> What is the status of this work? >>>> >>>> Philipp's patches have been reworked with the review feedback from the >>>> last round and a new version will be posted when he is back from >>>> holidays. >>> >>> IMO Philipp's patches are better integrated and well structured, so I'd >>> rather like to see his work in at some point. >> >> >> Granted I am biased, but I will state my case. "Better integrated" - my >> patches >> are also well integrated with the media core infrastructure. Philipp's >> patches >> in fact require modification to media core, whereas mine require none. >> Some changes are needed of course (more subdev type definitions for >> one). >> >> As for "well structured", I don't really understand what is meant by that, >> but my driver is also well structured. >> >> Philipp's driver only supports unconverted image capture from the SMFC. In >> addition >> to that, mine allows for all the hardware links supported by the IPU, >> including routing >> frames from the CSI directly to the Image converter for scaling up to >> 4096x4096, >> colorspace conversion, rotation, and motion compensated de-interlace. Yes >> all these >> conversion can be carried out post-capture via a mem2mem device, but >> conversion >> directly from CSI capture has advantages, including minimized CPU >> utilization and >> lower AXI bus traffic. In any case, Freescale added these hardware paths, >> and my >> driver supports them. > > I had a deeper look to both drivers, and I must say the features of > Steve's one are really interesting. > I don't think any of those has been tested with digital inputs (I have > ADV76xx chips on my board, which I hope will be available one day for > those interested) and so, I can test and help adding some of the > missing parts. > And for at least a week or two, I have all of my time for it, so it > would be of great help to know which one has the bigger chance to be > integrated... :) Steve's series is definitely preferred from my point of view. The feature set is clearly superior to Philipp's driver. I plan on reviewing Steve's series soonish but a quick scan didn't see anything suspicious. The code looks clean, and I am leaning towards getting this in sooner rather than later, so if you have the time to work on this, then go for it! Steve, I have a SabreLite and a ov5642 sensor, so I should be able to test that driver. There is also an ov5642 sensor driver in drivers/media/i2/soc_camera/ov5642.c. But nobody AFAIK is using it, so I would be inclined to take your code and remove the soc_camera driver. Regards, Hans