| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 13:36:21 -0600
From: Benoit Parrot <bparrot@...com>
To: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
CC: "Lad, Prabhakar" <prabhakar.csengg@...il.com>,
LMML <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <m.chehab@...sung.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@....fi>,
Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: i2c: add support for omnivision's ov2659 sensor
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com> wrote on Thu [2015-Feb-05 16:52:22 +0200]:
> Hi Prabhakar,
>
> (CC'ing Benoit Parrot)
>
> On Thursday 05 February 2015 11:55:28 Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 04 February 2015 20:55:02 Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> > >> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > >> > On Thursday 15 January 2015 23:39:23 Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> > >> >> From: Benoit Parrot <bparrot@...com>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> this patch adds support for omnivision's ov2659
> > >> >> sensor.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Signed-off-by: Benoit Parrot <bparrot@...com>
> > >> >> Signed-off-by: Lad, Prabhakar <prabhakar.csengg@...il.com>
> > >> >> ---
> > >> >>
> > >> >> .../devicetree/bindings/media/i2c/ov2659.txt | 33 +
> > >> >> .../devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt | 1 +
> > >> >> MAINTAINERS | 10 +
> > >> >> drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig | 11 +
> > >> >> drivers/media/i2c/Makefile | 1 +
> > >> >> drivers/media/i2c/ov2659.c | 1623 +++++++++++
> > >> >> include/media/ov2659.h | 33 +
> > >> >> 7 files changed, 1712 insertions(+)
> > >> >> create mode 100644
> > >> >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/i2c/ov2659.txt
> > >> >> create mode 100644 drivers/media/i2c/ov2659.c
> > >> >> create mode 100644 include/media/ov2659.h
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > >> >> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/ov2659.c b/drivers/media/i2c/ov2659.c
> > >> >> new file mode 100644
> > >> >> index 0000000..ce8ec8d
> > >> >> --- /dev/null
> > >> >> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/ov2659.c
> > >> >> @@ -0,0 +1,1623 @@
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > >> >> +static const struct ov2659_framesize ov2659_framesizes[] = {
> > >> >> + { /* QVGA */
> > >> >> + .width = 320,
> > >> >> + .height = 240,
> > >> >> + .regs = ov2659_qvga,
> > >> >> + .max_exp_lines = 248,
> > >> >> + }, { /* VGA */
> > >> >> + .width = 640,
> > >> >> + .height = 480,
> > >> >> + .regs = ov2659_vga,
> > >> >> + .max_exp_lines = 498,
> > >> >> + }, { /* SVGA */
> > >> >> + .width = 800,
> > >> >> + .height = 600,
> > >> >> + .regs = ov2659_svga,
> > >> >> + .max_exp_lines = 498,
> > >> >> + }, { /* XGA */
> > >> >> + .width = 1024,
> > >> >> + .height = 768,
> > >> >> + .regs = ov2659_xga,
> > >> >> + .max_exp_lines = 498,
> > >> >> + }, { /* 720P */
> > >> >> + .width = 1280,
> > >> >> + .height = 720,
> > >> >> + .regs = ov2659_720p,
> > >> >> + .max_exp_lines = 498,
> > >> >> + }, { /* SXGA */
> > >> >> + .width = 1280,
> > >> >> + .height = 1024,
> > >> >> + .regs = ov2659_sxga,
> > >> >> + .max_exp_lines = 1048,
> > >> >> + }, { /* UXGA */
> > >> >> + .width = 1600,
> > >> >> + .height = 1200,
> > >> >> + .regs = ov2659_uxga,
> > >> >> + .max_exp_lines = 498,
> > >> >> + },
> > >> >> +};
> > >> >
> > >> > That's what bothers me the most about drivers for Omnivision sensors.
> > >> > For some reason (I'd bet on lack of proper documentation) they list a
> > >> > couple of supported resolutions with corresponding register values,
> > >> > instead of computing the register values from the format configured by
> > >> > userspace. That's not the way we want to go. Prabhakar, do you have
> > >> > enough documentation to fix that ?
> > >>
> > >> I am afraid I have limited documentation here.
> > >
> > > How limited ? :-) I assume someone has documentation, given that the patch
> > > contains a larger number of #define's with register names.
> >
> > Yea I don’t have NDA signed with TI/Omnivision :( because I which I
> > lack the documentation.
>
> And a quick online search doesn't show any leaked datasheet. Wikileaks isn't
> doing a good job ;-)
>
> Benoit, do you think this is something that can be fixed ?
Laurent,
I did spend several days (many moons ago) to try and derive a generic
way to set the output resolution dynamically. However even though
the data sheet is somewhat useful, the various working example config
from the vendor make use of several un-documented registers which
make this pretty much unfeasible.
I am afraid we are stuck with this method for the time being.
Regards,
Benoit Parrot
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Laurent Pinchart
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists