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=-9.2 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=ham 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 E089DC43441 for ; Tue, 13 Nov 2018 16:00:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E5EA21780 for ; Tue, 13 Nov 2018 16:00:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.i=@cisco.com header.b="iwaL+Cyb" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9E5EA21780 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=cisco.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388037AbeKNB7J (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2018 20:59:09 -0500 Received: from aer-iport-2.cisco.com ([173.38.203.52]:4047 "EHLO aer-iport-2.cisco.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726856AbeKNB7J (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2018 20:59:09 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3807; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1542124827; x=1543334427; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=r4Wytj6twMLgFxLDTGdV2vcE9c7IRhWeSZS/KAokyj0=; b=iwaL+Cyb7uyEj85ZDzzq/QHCLaNTkGwQ0K+FwhSmzNzTHNG+vANraia+ d+OO5KD7jIxycoPpMDus2EFEPBXBrEJw1hXHuwgrdK45mzrPesOSMbpT8 WDwZ2vvxtLnJf+088V7p3tGIKQdvrgsdwP2yRQoDlchT9PlWNyIiXVtSd s=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.54,499,1534809600"; d="scan'208";a="8017978" Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-1.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 Nov 2018 16:00:26 +0000 Received: from [10.47.79.81] ([10.47.79.81]) (authenticated bits=0) by aer-core-1.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id wADG0P1B025786 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 13 Nov 2018 16:00:25 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] media: Allwinner A10 CSI support To: Maxime Ripard Cc: Thomas Petazzoni , Hans Verkuil , Hans Verkuil , Sakari Ailus , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Laurent Pinchart , linux-media@vger.kernel.org, Andrzej Hajda , Chen-Yu Tsai , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Mark Rutland , Rob Herring , Frank Rowand References: <20181113135259.onutfjtoi25afnfe@flea> <20181113155227.62jjs3mpomwgr7xd@flea> From: Hans Verkuil Message-ID: Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2018 17:00:25 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20181113155227.62jjs3mpomwgr7xd@flea> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated-User: hansverk X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 10.47.79.81, [10.47.79.81] X-Outbound-Node: aer-core-1.cisco.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/13/18 16:52, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 03:01:45PM +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: >> On 11/13/18 14:52, Maxime Ripard wrote: >>> Hi Hans, >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 01:30:49PM +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: >>>> On 11/13/18 09:24, Maxime Ripard wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Here is a series introducing the support for the A10 (and SoCs of the same >>>>> generation) CMOS Sensor Interface (called CSI, not to be confused with >>>>> MIPI-CSI, which isn't support by that IP). >>>>> >>>>> That interface is pretty straightforward, but the driver has a few issues >>>>> that I wanted to bring up: >>>>> >>>>> * The only board I've been testing this with has an ov5640 sensor >>>>> attached, which doesn't work with the upstream driver. Copying the >>>>> Allwinner init sequence works though, and this is how it has been >>>>> tested. Testing with a second sensor would allow to see if it's an >>>>> issue on the CSI side or the sensor side. >>>>> * When starting a capture, the last buffer to capture will fail due to >>>>> double buffering being used, and we don't have a next buffer for the >>>>> last frame. I'm not sure how to deal with that though. It seems like >>>>> some drivers use a scratch buffer in such a case, some don't care, so >>>>> I'm not sure which solution should be preferred. >>>>> * We don't have support for the ISP at the moment, but this can be added >>>>> eventually. >>>>> >>>>> * How to model the CSI module clock isn't really clear to me. It looks >>>>> like it goes through the CSI controller and then is muxed to one of the >>>>> CSI pin so that it can clock the sensor. I'm not quite sure how to >>>>> model it, if it should be a clock, the CSI driver being a clock >>>>> provider, or if the sensor should just use the module clock directly. >>>>> >>>>> Here is the v4l2-compliance output: >>>> >>>> Test v4l2-compliance with the -s option so you test streaming as well. >>>> Even better is -f where it tests streaming with all available formats. >>> >>> I will, thanks for the tip! >>> >>>>> v4l2-compliance SHA : 339d550e92ac15de8668f32d66d16f198137006c >>>> >>>> Hmm, I can't find this SHA. Was this built from the main v4l-utils repo? >>> >>> It was, but using Buildroot. The version packaged in the latest stable >>> version I was using (2018.08) is 1.14.2. >> >> That's seriously out of date. That's why I show the SHA, to see if >> someone is testing with a recent version of the utility, so it served >> its purpose here :-) >> >> Latest release is 1.16.2. >> >> But when submitting new drivers you really need to build it yourself from >> the master branch, that's the only way to be sure you have all the latest >> compliance checks. > > Ack, I'll update it and test again then. > >>> >>> Looking at the Makefile from v4l2-compliance, it looks like it just >>> invokes git to retrieve the git commit and uses that as the hash. In >>> Buildroot's case, since buildroot will download the tarball, this will >>> end up returning the SHA commit of the buildroot repo building the >>> sources, not the version of the sources themselves. >>> >>> I'm not sure how to address that properly though. Thomas, how do you >>> usually deal with this? >> >> Note that cec-compliance and cec-follower do the same, for the same >> reason. >> >> Where does the tarball come from? > > This is the official tarball from linuxtv: > https://git.buildroot.net/buildroot/tree/package/libv4l/libv4l.mk?h=2018.08.2#n8 Weird, if I build directly from that tarball, then v4l2-compliance should say: v4l2-compliance SHA: not available, 64 bits So that's what I expect to see from buildroot as well. Regards, Hans