From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932380AbdHYLau (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Aug 2017 07:30:50 -0400 Received: from ec2-52-27-115-49.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com ([52.27.115.49]:49870 "EHLO osg.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754691AbdHYLas (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Aug 2017 07:30:48 -0400 Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2017 08:30:37 -0300 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab To: Hans Verkuil Cc: Hans Verkuil , Linux Doc Mailing List , Linux Media Mailing List , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet , Laurent Pinchart , Sakari Ailus , Hans Verkuil Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] media: videodev2: add a flag for vdev-centric devices Message-ID: <20170825083037.772cb089@vento.lan> In-Reply-To: <20170825081503.13e4df80@vento.lan> References: <8d504be517755ee9449a007b5f2de52738c2df63.1503653839.git.mchehab@s-opensource.com> <4f771cfa-0e0d-3548-a363-6470b32a6634@cisco.com> <20170825070632.28580858@vento.lan> <44bdeabc-8899-8f7e-dd26-4284c5b589a1@cisco.com> <20170825073517.1112d618@vento.lan> <7d5f952b-028d-0770-0f37-39ab011ec740@cisco.com> <20170825075044.7ffe3232@vento.lan> <20170825081503.13e4df80@vento.lan> Organization: Samsung X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Em Fri, 25 Aug 2017 08:15:03 -0300 Mauro Carvalho Chehab escreveu: > Em Fri, 25 Aug 2017 12:56:30 +0200 > Hans Verkuil escreveu: > > > On 25/08/17 12:50, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > > Em Fri, 25 Aug 2017 12:42:51 +0200 > > > Hans Verkuil escreveu: > > > > > >> On 08/25/2017 12:35 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > >>> Em Fri, 25 Aug 2017 12:13:53 +0200 > > >>> Hans Verkuil escreveu: > > >>> > > >>>> On 08/25/2017 12:06 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > >>>>> Em Fri, 25 Aug 2017 11:44:27 +0200 > > >>>>> Hans Verkuil escreveu: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> On 08/25/2017 11:40 AM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > >>>>>>> From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> As both vdev-centric and mc-centric devices may implement the > > >>>>>>> same APIs, we need a flag to allow userspace to distinguish > > >>>>>>> between them. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab > > >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab > > >>>>>>> --- > > >>>>>>> Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/open.rst | 6 ++++++ > > >>>>>>> Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/vidioc-querycap.rst | 4 ++++ > > >>>>>>> include/uapi/linux/videodev2.h | 2 ++ > > >>>>>>> 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+) > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/open.rst b/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/open.rst > > >>>>>>> index a72d142897c0..eb3f0ec57edb 100644 > > >>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/open.rst > > >>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/open.rst > > >>>>>>> @@ -33,6 +33,12 @@ For **vdev-centric** control, the device and their corresponding hardware > > >>>>>>> pipelines are controlled via the **V4L2 device** node. They may optionally > > >>>>>>> expose via the :ref:`media controller API `. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> +.. note:: > > >>>>>>> + > > >>>>>>> + **vdev-centric** devices should report V4L2_VDEV_CENTERED > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> You mean CENTRIC, not CENTERED. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Yeah, true. I'll fix it. > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> But I would change this to MC_CENTRIC: the vast majority of drivers are VDEV centric, > > >>>>>> so it makes a lot more sense to keep that as the default and only set the cap for > > >>>>>> MC-centric drivers. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I actually focused it on what an userspace application would do. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> An specialized application for a given hardware will likely just > > >>>>> ignore whatever flag is added, and use vdev, mc and subdev APIs > > >>>>> as it pleases. So, those applications don't need any flag at all. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> However, a generic application needs a flag to allow them to check > > >>>>> if a given hardware can be controlled by the traditional way > > >>>>> to control the device (e. g. if it accepts vdev-centric type of > > >>>>> hardware control). > > >>>>> > > >>>>> It is an old desire (since when MC was designed) to allow that > > >>>>> generic V4L2 apps to also work with MC-centric hardware somehow. > > >>>> > > >>>> No, not true. The desire is that they can use the MC to find the > > >>>> various device nodes (video, radio, vbi, rc, cec, ...). But they > > >>>> remain vdev-centric. vdev vs mc centric has nothing to do with the > > >>>> presence of the MC. It's how they are controlled. > > >>> > > >>> No, that's not I'm talking about. I'm talking about libv4l plugin > > >>> (or whatever) that would allow a generic app to work with a mc-centric > > >>> device. That's there for a long time (since when we were reviewing > > >>> the MC patches back in 2009 or 2010). > > >> > > >> So? Such a plugin would obviously remove the MC_CENTRIC cap. Which makes > > >> perfect sense. > > >> > > >> There are a lot of userspace applications that do not use libv4l. It's > > >> optional, not required, to use that library. We cannot design our API with > > >> the assumption that this library will be used. > > >> > > >>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Regarding userspace applications: they can't check for a VDEV_CENTRIC > > >>>> cap since we never had any. I.e., if they do: > > >>>> > > >>>> if (!(caps & VDEV_CENTRIC)) > > >>>> /* unsupported device */ > > >>>> > > >>>> then they would fail for older kernels that do not set this flag. > > >>>> > > >>>> But this works: > > >>>> > > >>>> if (caps & MC_CENTRIC) > > >>>> /* unsupported device */ > > >>>> > > >>>> So this really needs to be an MC_CENTRIC capability. > > >>> > > >>> That won't work. The test should take into account the API version > > >>> too. > > >>> > > >>> Assuming that such flag would be added for version 4.15, with a VDEV_CENTRIC, > > >>> the check would be: > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> /* > > >>> * There's no need to check version here: libv4l may override it > > >>> * to support a mc-centric device even for older versions of the > > >>> * Kernel > > >>> */ > > >>> if (caps & V4L2_CAP_VDEV_CENTRIC) > > >>> is_supported = true; > > >>> > > >>> /* > > >>> * For API version lower than 4.15, there's no way to know for > > >>> * sure if the device is vdev-centric or not. So, either additional > > >>> * tests are needed, or it would assume vdev-centric and output > > >>> * some note about that. > > >>> */ > > >>> if (version < KERNEL_VERSION(4, 15, 0)) > > >>> maybe_supported = true; > > >> > > >> > > >> is_supported = true; > > >> if (caps & V4L2_CAP_MC_CENTRIC) > > >> is_supported = false; > > >> if (version < KERNEL_VERSION(4, 15, 0)) > > >> maybe_supported = true; > > >> > > >> I don't see the difference. BTW, no application will ever do that version check. > > >> It doesn't help them in any way to know that it 'may' be supported. > > > > > > Yeah, this can work. The only drawback is that, if we end by > > > implementing vdev compatible support is that such drivers will > > > have to clean the V4L2_CAP_MC_CENTRIC flag. > > > > You mean implementing vdev compatible support in libv4l? (Just making sure > > I understand you correctly) > > Yes, either there or at the Kernel, as it seems we'll never have it > there, as nobody is working on it anymore. > > > In that case it doesn't matter if the libv4l code would set the VDEV_CENTRIC flag > > or remove the MC_CENTRIC flag. That makes no difference, or course. > > True, but the text will have to be clear that a MC_CENTRIC device is a > device that can't be controlled by a V4L2-centric application. Ok, that's the "reverse" patch. IMHO, it is very confusing, as we're actually using MC_CENTRIC to actually describe the lack of a capability. Perhaps we should name it as NOT_VDEV_CENTRIC instead. Regards, Mauro --- media: videodev2: add a flag for mc-centric devices As both vdev-centric and mc-centric devices may implement the same APIs, we need a flag to allow userspace to distinguish between them. Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab diff --git a/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/open.rst b/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/open.rst index a72d142897c0..4b2f807269e7 100644 --- a/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/open.rst +++ b/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/open.rst @@ -6,6 +6,8 @@ Opening and Closing Devices *************************** +.. _v4l2_hardware_control: + Types of V4L2 hardware control ============================== @@ -33,6 +35,13 @@ For **vdev-centric** control, the device and their corresponding hardware pipelines are controlled via the **V4L2 device** node. They may optionally expose via the :ref:`media controller API `. +.. note:: + + Devices that are **not** capable of **vdev-centric** hardware control + should report a ``V4L2_MC_CENTRIC`` :c:type:`v4l2_capability` flag + (see :ref:`VIDIOC_QUERYCAP`). + + For **MC-centric** control, before using the V4L2 device, it is required to set the hardware pipelines via the :ref:`media controller API `. For those devices, the diff --git a/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/vidioc-querycap.rst b/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/vidioc-querycap.rst index 12e0d9a63cd8..299a53d66032 100644 --- a/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/vidioc-querycap.rst +++ b/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/vidioc-querycap.rst @@ -252,6 +252,11 @@ specification the ioctl returns an ``EINVAL`` error code. * - ``V4L2_CAP_TOUCH`` - 0x10000000 - This is a touch device. + * - ``V4L2_MC_CENTRIC`` + - 0x20000000 + - Indicates that the device only provides **mc-centric** hardware + control, and can't be used by **v4l2-centric** applications. + See :ref:`v4l2_hardware_control` for more details. * - ``V4L2_CAP_DEVICE_CAPS`` - 0x80000000 - The driver fills the ``device_caps`` field. This capability can diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/videodev2.h b/include/uapi/linux/videodev2.h index 45cf7359822c..569eef0630ab 100644 --- a/include/uapi/linux/videodev2.h +++ b/include/uapi/linux/videodev2.h @@ -460,6 +460,8 @@ struct v4l2_capability { #define V4L2_CAP_TOUCH 0x10000000 /* Is a touch device */ +#define V4L2_CAP_MC_CENTRIC 0x20000000 /* Device can't be controlled via V4L2 device devnodes */ + #define V4L2_CAP_DEVICE_CAPS 0x80000000 /* sets device capabilities field */ /*