From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07B5BC63777 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 10:27:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 954DF2075E for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 10:27:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="I0vC7Pwp" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729327AbgK0K0w (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Nov 2020 05:26:52 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52280 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727333AbgK0K0v (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Nov 2020 05:26:51 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-x644.google.com (mail-ej1-x644.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::644]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D588DC0613D1 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 02:26:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ej1-x644.google.com with SMTP id mc24so6884057ejb.6 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 02:26:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=TkOHQKTJtQe0c6uHCNCzZuOlIoXCuox8ChgdYtvl4RE=; b=I0vC7PwpEZCoL+lnpk/fcIdWjkizsXIdAAx6LJtXiXI4leglPhdLPhqlMA3icki53i HyBgryTsqI560+oieoEt98fIs/iMG03u7BlRn1+Vey0aZDXZpYayYbNJ/T7j4nF4pCld W+i8jO16z3gPu8VWqtP5HFsbuVLr7/0HxK3yc= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=TkOHQKTJtQe0c6uHCNCzZuOlIoXCuox8ChgdYtvl4RE=; b=EthGpbLIbC0q+xaKItfJ1IPSQlXyg89cIN6YJzh+H4tqoFyRcV0xuShhsyHG+3MMNo ExqTLC18YUxtR+ATBddRtFNc/eHVjP2u7eC4fafqPkaGTx2CfoEU2OD6fLV+ouCb9EKQ aWbCc1N8P+a1ejjqLJVgp2P9yfUHI1TUDJwv1zKvb9rc8u5RGLyq+PENs9f8s8xy/Pzr HcXrdWqov35lD/9PtMPzIR5/zPzRQGOzApVTVmrMdiNjTPAKSN60hT03BjpQWhPlmgjR 7yZHm4j04Dlk9Lb7tgyFSIihL6BHEiILN4Uu/31h57DqB5/D+hTa+UzJWDL4oGivB7Sz rTWQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532CbgivsSwoLaX++o6i50yFMoPlaKMsyiNtrv8pBTZAr7JWGPkw /P9Fz9Vn8WcW2MSqw+scMsceTnLwUFmTog== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzIg6SRxuddteCW0jHP3PnA1aokaOPGcYaXlIclCKtsKrGt8zSorVcbae0jSP63kIBLi0AR+g== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:60d4:: with SMTP id f20mr7139602ejk.156.1606472809324; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 02:26:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-f43.google.com (mail-wr1-f43.google.com. [209.85.221.43]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a3sm2582537edf.23.2020.11.27.02.26.47 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 27 Nov 2020 02:26:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-f43.google.com with SMTP id l1so5009821wrb.9 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 02:26:47 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:adf:e54f:: with SMTP id z15mr9785451wrm.159.1606472807482; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 02:26:47 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201116155008.118124-1-robert.foss@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: From: Tomasz Figa Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 19:26:35 +0900 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: ov8856: Remove 3280x2464 mode To: Robert Foss Cc: Bingbu Cao , Dongchun Zhu , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , linux-media , linux-kernel , Sakari Ailus , Ben Kao Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 7:00 PM Robert Foss wrote: > > On Wed, 25 Nov 2020 at 08:32, Tomasz Figa wrote: > > > > Hi Bingbu, > > > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 1:15 PM Bingbu Cao wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On 11/24/20 6:20 PM, Robert Foss wrote: > > > > On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 at 10:42, Bingbu Cao wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Hi, Robert > > > >> > > > >> I remember that the full size of ov8856 image sensor is 3296x2480 and we can get the 3280x2464 > > > >> frames based on current settings. > > > >> > > > >> Do you have any issues with this mode? > > > > > > > > As far as I can tell using the 3280x2464 mode actually yields an > > > > output resolution that is 3264x2448. > > > > > > > > What does your hardware setup look like? And which revision of the > > > > sensor are you using? > > > > > > > > > > Robert, the sensor revision I am using is v1.1. I just checked the actual output pixels on our > > > hardware, the output resolution with 2464 mode is 3280x2464, no black pixels. > > > > > > As Tomasz said, some ISP has the requirement of extra pixel padding, From the ov8856 datasheet, > > > the central 3264x2448 pixels are *suggested* to be output from the pixel array and the boundary > > > pixels can be used for additional processing. In my understanding, the 32 dummy lines are not > > > black lines. > > > > The datasheet says that only 3264x2448 are active pixels. What pixel > > values are you seeing outside of that central area? In the datasheet, > > those look like "optically black" pixels, which are not 100% black, > > but rather as if the sensor cells didn't receive any light - noise can > > be still there. > > > > I've been developing support for some Qcom ISP functionality, and > during the course of this I ran into the issue I was describing, where > the 3280x2464 mode actually outputs 3264x2448. > > I can think of two reasons for this, either ISP driver bugs on my end > or the fact that the sensor is being run outside of the specification > and which could be resulting in differences between how the ov8856 > sensors behave. I just confirmed and we're indeed using this mode in a number of our projects based on the Intel ISP and it seems to be producing a proper image with all pixels of the 3280x2464 matrix having proper values. I'm now double checking whether this isn't some processing done by the ISP, but I suspect the quality would be bad if it stretched the central 3264x2448 part into the 3280x2464 frame. Best regards, Tomasz