Čágo Belo Šílenci! :-)
> > +static int camera_subdev_parse(struct device *dev, struct
> > v4l2_async_notifier *notifier,
> > + const char *key)
> > +{
> > + struct device_node *node;
> > + struct isp_async_subdev *isd;
> > +
> > + printk("Looking for %s\n", key);
>
Čágo Belo Šílenci! :-)
> > +static int camera_subdev_parse(struct device *dev, struct
> > v4l2_async_notifier *notifier,
> > + const char *key)
> > +{
> > + struct device_node *node;
> > + struct isp_async_subdev *isd;
> > +
> > + printk("Looking for %s\n", key);
>
On Sat 2017-03-04 14:30:11, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 09:55:51AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Dobry den! :-)
>
> Huomenta! :-)
Dobry vecer! :-).
> > > Good point. Still there may be other ways to move the lens than the voice
> > > coil (which sure is cheap), so how about
On Sat 2017-03-04 14:30:11, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 09:55:51AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Dobry den! :-)
>
> Huomenta! :-)
Dobry vecer! :-).
> > > Good point. Still there may be other ways to move the lens than the voice
> > > coil (which sure is cheap), so how about
On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 09:55:51AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Dobry den! :-)
Huomenta! :-)
>
> > > > > Ok, I got the camera sensor to work. No subdevices support, so I don't
> > > > > have focus (etc) working, but that's a start. I also had to remove
> > > > > video-bus-switch support; but I
On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 09:55:51AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Dobry den! :-)
Huomenta! :-)
>
> > > > > Ok, I got the camera sensor to work. No subdevices support, so I don't
> > > > > have focus (etc) working, but that's a start. I also had to remove
> > > > > video-bus-switch support; but I
Dobry den! :-)
> > > > Ok, I got the camera sensor to work. No subdevices support, so I don't
> > > > have focus (etc) working, but that's a start. I also had to remove
> > > > video-bus-switch support; but I guess it will be easier to use
> > > > video-multiplexer patches...
> > > >
> > > >
Dobry den! :-)
> > > > Ok, I got the camera sensor to work. No subdevices support, so I don't
> > > > have focus (etc) working, but that's a start. I also had to remove
> > > > video-bus-switch support; but I guess it will be easier to use
> > > > video-multiplexer patches...
> > > >
> > > >
Hi!
> > > > > Making the sub-device bus configuration a pointer should be in a
> > > > > separate
> > > > > patch. It makes sense since the entire configuration is not valid for
> > > > > all
> > > > > sub-devices attached to the ISP anymore. I think it originally was a
> > > > > separate
Hi!
> > > > > Making the sub-device bus configuration a pointer should be in a
> > > > > separate
> > > > > patch. It makes sense since the entire configuration is not valid for
> > > > > all
> > > > > sub-devices attached to the ISP anymore. I think it originally was a
> > > > > separate
Hi!
> > > static int isp_fwnode_parse(struct device *dev, struct fwnode_handle
> > > *fwn,
> > >
> > > struct isp_async_subdev *isd)
> > >
> > > {
> > >
> > > - struct isp_bus_cfg *buscfg = >bus;
> > > + struct isp_bus_cfg *buscfg;
> > >
> > > struct
Hi!
> > > static int isp_fwnode_parse(struct device *dev, struct fwnode_handle
> > > *fwn,
> > >
> > > struct isp_async_subdev *isd)
> > >
> > > {
> > >
> > > - struct isp_bus_cfg *buscfg = >bus;
> > > + struct isp_bus_cfg *buscfg;
> > >
> > > struct
Hi Laurent,
On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 08:39:51PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Sakari,
>
> On Thursday 02 Mar 2017 16:16:17 Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 10:07:27AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > > Making the sub-device bus configuration a pointer should
Hi Laurent,
On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 08:39:51PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Sakari,
>
> On Thursday 02 Mar 2017 16:16:17 Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 10:07:27AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > > Making the sub-device bus configuration a pointer should
Hi Sakari,
On Thursday 02 Mar 2017 16:16:17 Sakari Ailus wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 10:07:27AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > > Making the sub-device bus configuration a pointer should be in a
> > > separate patch. It makes sense since the entire configuration is not
> > >
Hi Sakari,
On Thursday 02 Mar 2017 16:16:17 Sakari Ailus wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 10:07:27AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > > Making the sub-device bus configuration a pointer should be in a
> > > separate patch. It makes sense since the entire configuration is not
> > >
Hi Pavel,
On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 03:58:08PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > Making the sub-device bus configuration a pointer should be in a
> > > > separate
> > > > patch. It makes sense since the entire configuration is not valid for
> > > > all
> > > > sub-devices attached to
Hi Pavel,
On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 03:58:08PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > Making the sub-device bus configuration a pointer should be in a
> > > > separate
> > > > patch. It makes sense since the entire configuration is not valid for
> > > > all
> > > > sub-devices attached to
Hi!
> > > Making the sub-device bus configuration a pointer should be in a separate
> > > patch. It makes sense since the entire configuration is not valid for all
> > > sub-devices attached to the ISP anymore. I think it originally was a
> > > separate patch, but they probably have been merged
Hi!
> > > Making the sub-device bus configuration a pointer should be in a separate
> > > patch. It makes sense since the entire configuration is not valid for all
> > > sub-devices attached to the ISP anymore. I think it originally was a
> > > separate patch, but they probably have been merged
Hi Pavel,
On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 10:07:27AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > Making the sub-device bus configuration a pointer should be in a separate
> > patch. It makes sense since the entire configuration is not valid for all
> > sub-devices attached to the ISP anymore. I think it
Hi Pavel,
On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 10:07:27AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > Making the sub-device bus configuration a pointer should be in a separate
> > patch. It makes sense since the entire configuration is not valid for all
> > sub-devices attached to the ISP anymore. I think it
Hi!
> Making the sub-device bus configuration a pointer should be in a separate
> patch. It makes sense since the entire configuration is not valid for all
> sub-devices attached to the ISP anymore. I think it originally was a
> separate patch, but they probably have been merged at some point. I
Hi!
> Making the sub-device bus configuration a pointer should be in a separate
> patch. It makes sense since the entire configuration is not valid for all
> sub-devices attached to the ISP anymore. I think it originally was a
> separate patch, but they probably have been merged at some point. I
Hi!
> Please find my comments below.
Thanks for quick review, will fix.
> > switch (vfwn.base.port) {
> > case ISP_OF_PHY_CSIPHY1:
> > - buscfg->interface = ISP_INTERFACE_CSI2C_PHY1;
> > + if (csi1)
>
> You could compare vfwn.bus_type
Hi!
> Please find my comments below.
Thanks for quick review, will fix.
> > switch (vfwn.base.port) {
> > case ISP_OF_PHY_CSIPHY1:
> > - buscfg->interface = ISP_INTERFACE_CSI2C_PHY1;
> > + if (csi1)
>
> You could compare vfwn.bus_type
Hi Pavel,
Please find my comments below.
On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 11:12:55PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > On Mon 2017-02-20 15:56:36, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > > I've tested ACPI, will test DT soon...
> > > >
>
Hi Pavel,
Please find my comments below.
On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 11:12:55PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > On Mon 2017-02-20 15:56:36, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > > I've tested ACPI, will test DT soon...
> > > >
>
Hi!
> > > On Mon 2017-02-20 15:56:36, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > > I've tested ACPI, will test DT soon...
> > > >
> > > > DT case works, too (Nokia N9).
> > >
> > > Hmm. Good to know. Now to figure out how to get N900 case
Hi!
> > > On Mon 2017-02-20 15:56:36, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > > I've tested ACPI, will test DT soon...
> > > >
> > > > DT case works, too (Nokia N9).
> > >
> > > Hmm. Good to know. Now to figure out how to get N900 case
Hyvää iltaa!
On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 09:38:51AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Ahoj! :-)
>
> > > > > Ok, I got the camera sensor to work. No subdevices support, so I don't
> > > > > have focus (etc) working, but that's a start. I also had to remove
> > > > > video-bus-switch support; but I guess
Hyvää iltaa!
On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 09:38:51AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Ahoj! :-)
>
> > > > > Ok, I got the camera sensor to work. No subdevices support, so I don't
> > > > > have focus (etc) working, but that's a start. I also had to remove
> > > > > video-bus-switch support; but I guess
Ahoj! :-)
> > > > Ok, I got the camera sensor to work. No subdevices support, so I don't
> > > > have focus (etc) working, but that's a start. I also had to remove
> > > > video-bus-switch support; but I guess it will be easier to use
> > > > video-multiplexer patches...
> > > >
> > > > I'll
Ahoj! :-)
> > > > Ok, I got the camera sensor to work. No subdevices support, so I don't
> > > > have focus (etc) working, but that's a start. I also had to remove
> > > > video-bus-switch support; but I guess it will be easier to use
> > > > video-multiplexer patches...
> > > >
> > > > I'll
Moi! :-)
On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 10:53:22PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > Ok, I got the camera sensor to work. No subdevices support, so I don't
> > > have focus (etc) working, but that's a start. I also had to remove
> > > video-bus-switch support; but I guess it will be easier to
Moi! :-)
On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 10:53:22PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > Ok, I got the camera sensor to work. No subdevices support, so I don't
> > > have focus (etc) working, but that's a start. I also had to remove
> > > video-bus-switch support; but I guess it will be easier to
Hi!
> > Making the sub-device bus configuration a pointer should be in a separate
> > patch. It makes sense since the entire configuration is not valid for all
> > sub-devices attached to the ISP anymore. I think it originally was a
> > separate patch, but they probably have been merged at some
Hi!
> > Making the sub-device bus configuration a pointer should be in a separate
> > patch. It makes sense since the entire configuration is not valid for all
> > sub-devices attached to the ISP anymore. I think it originally was a
> > separate patch, but they probably have been merged at some
Hi!
> > On Mon 2017-02-20 15:56:36, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > I've tested ACPI, will test DT soon...
> > >
> > > DT case works, too (Nokia N9).
> >
> > Hmm. Good to know. Now to figure out how to get N900 case to work...
> >
Hi!
> > On Mon 2017-02-20 15:56:36, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > I've tested ACPI, will test DT soon...
> > >
> > > DT case works, too (Nokia N9).
> >
> > Hmm. Good to know. Now to figure out how to get N900 case to work...
> >
Hi!
> > Ok, I got the camera sensor to work. No subdevices support, so I don't
> > have focus (etc) working, but that's a start. I also had to remove
> > video-bus-switch support; but I guess it will be easier to use
> > video-multiplexer patches...
> >
> > I'll have patches over weekend.
>
>
Hi!
> > Ok, I got the camera sensor to work. No subdevices support, so I don't
> > have focus (etc) working, but that's a start. I also had to remove
> > video-bus-switch support; but I guess it will be easier to use
> > video-multiplexer patches...
> >
> > I'll have patches over weekend.
>
>
On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 01:09:18AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Tue 2017-02-21 13:11:04, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 12:07:21PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > On Mon 2017-02-20 15:56:36, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus
On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 01:09:18AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Tue 2017-02-21 13:11:04, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 12:07:21PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > On Mon 2017-02-20 15:56:36, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus
On Tue 2017-02-21 13:11:04, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 12:07:21PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Mon 2017-02-20 15:56:36, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > I've tested ACPI, will test DT soon...
> > >
> > > DT
On Tue 2017-02-21 13:11:04, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 12:07:21PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Mon 2017-02-20 15:56:36, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > I've tested ACPI, will test DT soon...
> > >
> > > DT
Hi!
On Tue 2017-02-21 13:11:04, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 12:07:21PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Mon 2017-02-20 15:56:36, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > I've tested ACPI, will test DT soon...
> > >
> > >
Hi!
On Tue 2017-02-21 13:11:04, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 12:07:21PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Mon 2017-02-20 15:56:36, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > I've tested ACPI, will test DT soon...
> > >
> > >
On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 12:07:21PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2017-02-20 15:56:36, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > I've tested ACPI, will test DT soon...
> >
> > DT case works, too (Nokia N9).
>
> Hmm. Good to know. Now to
On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 12:07:21PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2017-02-20 15:56:36, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > I've tested ACPI, will test DT soon...
> >
> > DT case works, too (Nokia N9).
>
> Hmm. Good to know. Now to
On Mon 2017-02-20 15:56:36, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > I've tested ACPI, will test DT soon...
>
> DT case works, too (Nokia N9).
Hmm. Good to know. Now to figure out how to get N900 case to work...
AFAICT N9 has CSI2, not CSI1
On Mon 2017-02-20 15:56:36, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > I've tested ACPI, will test DT soon...
>
> DT case works, too (Nokia N9).
Hmm. Good to know. Now to figure out how to get N900 case to work...
AFAICT N9 has CSI2, not CSI1
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> I've tested ACPI, will test DT soon...
DT case works, too (Nokia N9).
--
Sakari Ailus
e-mail: sakari.ai...@iki.fi XMPP: sai...@retiisi.org.uk
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 03:09:13PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> I've tested ACPI, will test DT soon...
DT case works, too (Nokia N9).
--
Sakari Ailus
e-mail: sakari.ai...@iki.fi XMPP: sai...@retiisi.org.uk
Hi Pavel,
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:31:14AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Tue 2017-02-14 23:38:49, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > From: Sebastian Reichel
> >
> > If v4l2_device_register_subdev_nodes() is called multiple times, it is
> > better to return early than corrupt
Hi Pavel,
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:31:14AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Tue 2017-02-14 23:38:49, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > From: Sebastian Reichel
> >
> > If v4l2_device_register_subdev_nodes() is called multiple times, it is
> > better to return early than corrupt memory.
> >
> >
Hi!
On Tue 2017-02-14 23:38:49, Pavel Machek wrote:
> From: Sebastian Reichel
>
> If v4l2_device_register_subdev_nodes() is called multiple times, it is
> better to return early than corrupt memory.
>
> Without this, exposure / gain controls do not work in the camera
>
Hi!
On Tue 2017-02-14 23:38:49, Pavel Machek wrote:
> From: Sebastian Reichel
>
> If v4l2_device_register_subdev_nodes() is called multiple times, it is
> better to return early than corrupt memory.
>
> Without this, exposure / gain controls do not work in the camera
> application on N900.
>
From: Sebastian Reichel
If v4l2_device_register_subdev_nodes() is called multiple times, it is
better to return early than corrupt memory.
Without this, exposure / gain controls do not work in the camera
application on N900.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Reichel
From: Sebastian Reichel
If v4l2_device_register_subdev_nodes() is called multiple times, it is
better to return early than corrupt memory.
Without this, exposure / gain controls do not work in the camera
application on N900.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Reichel
Signed-off-by: Ivaylo Dimitrov
60 matches
Mail list logo