Re: [PATCH v3 08/10] media: i2c: imx290: Add support to enumerate all frame sizes

From: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@iki.fi>
To: Andrey Konovalov <andrey.konovalov@linaro.org>
Cc: mchehab@kernel.org, manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org,
	linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	c.barrett@framos.com, a.brela@framos.com,
	peter.griffin@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 08/10] media: i2c: imx290: Add support to enumerate all frame sizes
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2020 11:00:43 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200608080043.GN9947@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <effee6cc-680f-3234-2e56-2f6b24d107cd@linaro.org>

On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 07:28:56PM +0300, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> Hi Sakari,
> 
> Thank you for the review!
> 
> On 26.05.2020 12:17, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > Hi Andrey,
> > 
> > On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 10:25:03PM +0300, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > > From: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
> > > 
> > > Add support to enumerate all frame sizes supported by IMX290. This is
> > > required for using with userspace tools such as libcamera.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
> > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov <andrey.konovalov@linaro.org>
> > > ---
> > >   drivers/media/i2c/imx290.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> > >   1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/imx290.c b/drivers/media/i2c/imx290.c
> > > index 6e70ff22bc5f..88850f3b1427 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/media/i2c/imx290.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/imx290.c
> > > @@ -471,6 +471,25 @@ static int imx290_enum_mbus_code(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
> > >   	return 0;
> > >   }
> > > +static int imx290_enum_frame_size(struct v4l2_subdev *subdev,
> > > +				  struct v4l2_subdev_pad_config *cfg,
> > > +				  struct v4l2_subdev_frame_size_enum *fse)
> > > +{
> > > +	if ((fse->code != imx290_formats[0].code) &&
> > > +	    (fse->code != imx290_formats[1].code))
> > > +		return -EINVAL;
> > 
> > Please skip the modes that do not have the code specified by the user. They
> > should not be enumerated here.
> 
> I've double checked this part of the code, and it doesn't seem to need changes.
> The reason is that for the both codes the set of the modes and the frame sizes is
> exactly the same. And the fse->code check above just guards against the codes not
> supported by the driver at all.

Indeed. Please then ignore the comment.

-- 
Sakari Ailus