Re: [PATCH RFC v2 0/2] pxa_camera transition to v4l2 standalone device

2016-07-04 Thread Robert Jarzmik
Hans Verkuil writes: > Hi Robert, > > On 04/02/2016 04:26 PM, Robert Jarzmik wrote: >> Hi Hans and Guennadi, >> >> This is the second opus of this RFC. The goal is still to see how close our >> ports are to see if there are things we could either reuse of change. >> >> From

Re: [PATCH RFC v2 0/2] pxa_camera transition to v4l2 standalone device

2016-07-04 Thread Hans Verkuil
On 04/02/2016 04:26 PM, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > Hi Hans and Guennadi, > > This is the second opus of this RFC. The goal is still to see how close our > ports are to see if there are things we could either reuse of change. > > From RFCv1, the main change is cleaning up in function names and

Re: [PATCH RFC v2 0/2] pxa_camera transition to v4l2 standalone device

2016-07-04 Thread Hans Verkuil
Hi Robert, On 04/02/2016 04:26 PM, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > Hi Hans and Guennadi, > > This is the second opus of this RFC. The goal is still to see how close our > ports are to see if there are things we could either reuse of change. > > From RFCv1, the main change is cleaning up in function

Re: [PATCH RFC v2 0/2] pxa_camera transition to v4l2 standalone device

2016-04-04 Thread Robert Jarzmik
Hans Verkuil writes: > Hi Robert, > > It's been a very busy time for me, and both Guennadi and myself are attending > the > ELC the coming week. Speaking for myself that means that it is unlikely I'll > have > time to review anything for the next two weeks. > > My own

Re: [PATCH RFC v2 0/2] pxa_camera transition to v4l2 standalone device

2016-04-03 Thread Hans Verkuil
Hi Robert, Thanks for the patches! On 04/02/2016 07:26 AM, Robert Jarzmik wrote: Hi Hans and Guennadi, This is the second opus of this RFC. The goal is still to see how close our ports are to see if there are things we could either reuse of change. From RFCv1, the main change is cleaning up

[PATCH RFC v2 0/2] pxa_camera transition to v4l2 standalone device

2016-04-02 Thread Robert Jarzmik
Hi Hans and Guennadi, This is the second opus of this RFC. The goal is still to see how close our ports are to see if there are things we could either reuse of change. >From RFCv1, the main change is cleaning up in function names and functions grouping, and fixes to make v4l2-compliance happy