Hello,
On Monday 13 July 2015 11:03:43 Sakari Ailus wrote:
> Helen Fornazier wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Helen Fornazier wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 6:19 AM, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> >>> Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> >>>> On Monday 29 June 2015 10:23:34 Sakari Ailus wrote:
> >>>>> Helen Fornazier wrote:
> >>>>>> According to the V4L2 API, the VIDIOC_STREAMON ioctl should return
> >>>>>> EPIPE when the pipeline configuration is invalid.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As the .vidioc_streamon in the v4l2_ioctl_ops usually forwards the
> >>>>>> error caused by the v4l2_subdev_link_validate_default (if it is in
> >>>>>> use), it should return -EPIPE if it detects a format mismatch in the
> >>>>>> pipeline configuration
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Only link configuration errors have yielded -EPIPE so far, sub-device
> >>>>> format configuration error has returned -INVAL instead as you noticed.
> >>>>
> >>>> It should also be noted that while v4l2_subdev_link_validate() will
> >>>> return -EINVAL in case of error, the only driver that performs custom
> >>>> link validation (omap3isp/ispccdc.c) will return -EPIPE.
> >>>
> >>> Good point. That has escaped me until now.
> >>>
> >>>>> There are not many sources of -EINVAL while enabling streaming and all
> >>>>> others are directly caused by the application; I lean towards thinking
> >>>>> the code is good as it was. The documentation could be improved
> >>>>> though. It may not be clear which error codes could be caused by
> >>>>> different conditions.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The debug level messages from media module
> >>>>> (drivers/media/media-entity.c) do provide more information if needed,
> >>>>> albeit this certainly is not an application interface.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I wonder what others think.
> >>>>
> >>>> There's a discrepancy between the implementation and the documentation,
> >>>> so at least one of them need to be fixed. -EPIPE would be coherent with
> >>>> the documentation and seems appropriately named, but another error code
> >>>> would allow userspace to tell link configuration and format
> >>>> configuration problems apart.
> >>>
> >>> That was the original intent, I think.
> >>>
> >>>> Do you think -EINVAL is the most appropriate error code for format
> >>>> configuration ? It's already used to indicate that the stream type is
> >>>> invalid or that not enough buffers have been allocated, and is also
> >>>> used by drivers directly for various purposes.
> >>>
> >>> That's true, it's been used also for that purpose. At the time this
> >>> certainly was not the primary concern. If you can think of a better
> >>> error code for the purpose (than EINVAL) I'm certainly fine with using
> >>> one.
> >>>
> >>> I still think that -EPIPE is worse for telling about incorrect format
> >>> configuration than -EINVAL since it's relatively easy to avoid -EINVAL
> >>> for the documented reasons.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I'd like just to point out where in the docs EPIPE for format mismatch
> >> is specified, as it is not described in the streamon page as I thought
> >> it would, but it is in the subdev page in case anyone is looking for
> >> it (as I took some time to find it too):
> >>
> >> http://linuxtv.org/downloads/v4l-dvb-apis/subdev.html
> >> "Applications are responsible for configuring coherent parameters on
> >> the whole pipeline and making sure that connected pads have compatible
> >> formats. The pipeline is checked for formats mismatch at
> >> VIDIOC_STREAMON time, and an EPIPE error code is then returned if the
> >> configuration is invalid"
> >>
> >> So maybe the doc should be improved as you already stated.
> >
> > I would like to revive this subject.
> >
> > Should we change the docs? Change the -EINVAL to -EPIPE, or create another
> > error code? What are your opinion?
> >
> > I read in the docs of dev-kmsg that EPIPE is returned when messages get
> > overwritten, and in other parts of the code EPIPE is returned when there
> > is an error in the pipeline communication level while trying to send
> > information through the pipe or a pipe broken error.
> >
> > But in the error-codes.txt files, the EPIPE error is defined as:
> > *EPIPE "The pipe type specified in the URB doesn't match the endpoint's
> > actual type"*
Just a bit of background information first. The Linux kernel uses error codes
standardized by POSIX. A limited number of additional error codes have been
added over time, but the usual approach when an error that doesn't match POSIX
semantics is to reuse an existing error code whose name matches the error
relatively well. EPIPE in USB is such an example, POSIX error codes have no
knowledge of USB. We have similarly selected EPIPE for the media controller
API as it seemed a good match to report errors related to the pipeline.
> This exact definition sound USB specific to me.
Yes, error-codes.txt is in Documentation/usb/, so that's expected :-)
> > Then, if EPIPE is used when types don't match between two endpoints, it
> > seems reasonable to me to use EPIPE when formats don't match either. Or do
> > "types" in this context have a specific definition? I don't know much
> > about URB, you may be able to judge this better.
>
> A short recap of the current situation as far as I understand it:
>
> - MC link validation failure yields EPIPE to the user space,
>
> - V4L2 sub-device format validation failure generally results in EINVAL,
> except that
>
> - omap3isp CCDC driver returns EPIPE instead and
>
> - EINVAL is used for many other purposes.
>
> The issues are inconsistency between omap3isp CCDC and other drivers in
> informing the user the sub-device format configuration is wrong. Also
> V4L2 sub-device format validation error cannot be told apart from other
> errors. These problems should be fixed, so that all three sources of
> errors yield a different error code (MC link validation, V4L2 format
> configuration and other plain V4L2 related errors).
>
> V4L2 will continue using EINVAL, that's for sure.
>
> Another error code I could think of is EMLINK ("Too many links"), which
ENOLINK might be better.
> is not a perfect match, but could be used. This is a better match for a
> link validation failure; V4L2 sub-device link validation failure would
> then use EPIPE (as omap3isp CCDC driver already does).
>
> Another option could be that V4L2 format validation failure would use
> ENOEXEC ("Exec format error") instead, and EPIPE would be left to link
> validation failures.
Granted, ENOEXEC mentions the word "format" in its documentation, but it's a
bit far-fetched :-)
> Better suggestions are welcome of course. I think I'm leaning towards
> the first option, but from backwards compatibility point of view the
> latter is better. The MC is no longer experimental so the latter might
> be the only option.
>
> My view is that this boils down to picking the most suitable error
> codes. Then fixing the documentation is easy.
>
> I wonder what Laurent and Hans think.
Using three different error codes as you mention above has my preference, but
we need to care about backward compatibility. No solution will be perfect
though, as the OMAP3 ISP returns different error codes for the same error
depending on which entity is concerned, so unifying the error codes will
result in user-visible changes.
Replacing EPIPE with EMLINK or ENOLINK is tempting but might be too risky in
terms of backward compatibility. If we can't do that, I'd prefer using EPIPE
to indicate broken pipelines due to both link setup issues and format
validation failures. This would at least match the documentation.
Hans, any opinion ?
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
--
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
