On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:42:16PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > Thanks for the update.
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 01:24:51PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > ...
> > > +static int et8ek8_set_ctrl(struct v4l2_ctrl *ctrl)
> > > +{
> > > + struct et8ek8_sensor *sensor =
> > > + container_of(ctrl->handler, struct et8ek8_sensor, ctrl_handler);
> > > +
> > > + switch (ctrl->id) {
> > > + case V4L2_CID_GAIN:
> > > + return et8ek8_set_gain(sensor, ctrl->val);
> > > +
> > > + case V4L2_CID_EXPOSURE:
> > > + {
> > > + int rows;
> > > + struct i2c_client *client =
> > > v4l2_get_subdevdata(&sensor->subdev);
> > > + rows = ctrl->val;
> > > + return et8ek8_i2c_write_reg(client, ET8EK8_REG_16BIT, 0x1243,
> > > + swab16(rows));
> >
> > Why swab16()? Doesn't the et8ek8_i2c_write_reg() already do the right thing?
> >
> > 16-bit writes aren't used elsewhere... and the register address and value
> > seem to have different endianness there, it looks like a bug to me in that
> > function.
>
> I'm pretty sure I did not invent that swab16(). I checked, and
> exposure seems to work properly. I tried swapping the bytes, but then
> exposure did not seem to work. So this one seems to be correct.
I can fix that too, but I have no device to test. In terms of how the
hardware is controlled there should be no difference anyway.
--
Sakari Ailus
e-mail: sakari.ai...@iki.fi XMPP: sai...@retiisi.org.uk
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
