Hello Laurent On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 7:44 PM, Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com> wrote: > Hi Ricardo, > > Thank you for the patch, and sorry for the late review (so late that the patch > has already been merged).
No worries. > > On Friday 20 March 2015 14:30:46 Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote: >> Volatile controls should not generate CH_VALUE events. > > What's the rationale for that ? I would actually expect the value change > events to be more useful for volatile controls than non-volatile controls. > Volatile controls can have their value changed by the hardware without > software intervention, and it makes sense to me to report that to userspace. Imagine a temperature register on the sensor. It is changing constantly, resolution 10 milidegrees: Do you want to get an event for every change? Who will poll the temperature? The driver? The hardware will irq the driver....? So I guess the less wrong solution is not throwing the ch_value event. This is just my two cents, probably Hans has a much better global view :) Regards. -- 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
