[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8be600b6-a424-ddda-8672-1aed4e925fe8@itdev.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 12:57:26 +0100
From: Nick Dyer <nick.dyer@...ev.co.uk>
To: Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>,
Alan Bowens <Alan.Bowens@...el.com>,
Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>,
Chris Healy <cphealy@...il.com>,
Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@...math.org>,
Andrew Duggan <aduggan@...aptics.com>,
James Chen <james.chen@....com.tw>,
Dudley Du <dudl@...ress.com>,
Andrew de los Reyes <adlr@...omium.org>,
sheckylin@...omium.org, Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@...-t.net>,
Florian Echtler <floe@...terbrot.org>, mchehab@....samsung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/9] Output raw touch data via V4L2
Hi Hans-
Thanks for reviewing this again in such detail.
On 27/06/2016 12:26, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> On 06/23/2016 12:08 AM, Nick Dyer wrote:
>> This is a series of patches to add output of raw touch diagnostic data via V4L2
>> to the Atmel maXTouch and Synaptics RMI4 drivers.
>>
>> It's a rewrite of the previous implementation which output via debugfs: it now
>> uses a V4L2 device in a similar way to the sur40 driver.
>>
>> We have a utility which can read the data and display it in a useful format:
>> https://github.com/ndyer/heatmap/commits/heatmap-v4l
>>
>> These patches are also available from
>> https://github.com/ndyer/linux/commits/v4l-touch-2016-06-22
>>
>> Changes in v5 (Hans Verkuil review):
>> - Update v4l2-core:
>> - Add VFL_TYPE_TOUCH, V4L2_BUF_TYPE_TOUCH_CAPTURE and V4L2_CAP_TOUCH
>
> The use of V4L2_CAP_TOUCH and V4L2_BUF_TYPE_TOUCH_CAPTURE is very inconsistent.
> What is the rationale of adding V4L2_BUF_TYPE_TOUCH_CAPTURE? I can't remember
> asking for it.
I am afraid that I missed updating atmel_mxt_ts from
V4L2_BUF_TYPE_VIDEO_CAPTURE to V4L2_BUF_TYPE_TOUCH_CAPTURE, which has
confused the situation.
Perhaps I read too much into your request that I look at the way that SDR
is treated. When I started going through the code paths in v4l2-core and
v4l2-compliance, it seemed cleaner to treat touch as completely separate,
hence introducing the new BUF_TYPE. I'm happy to try it without this.
> And wouldn't the use of V4L2_BUF_TYPE_TOUCH_CAPTURE break userspace for sur40?
I think it is likely, yes. And it looks like that would make Florian unhappy.
> I'm ambiguous towards having a V4L2_BUF_TYPE_TOUCH_CAPTURE, to be honest.
>
> I would also recommend renaming V4L2_CAP_TOUCH to V4L2_CAP_TOUCH_CAPTURE.
Do you agree with the following changes:
- Rename V4L2_CAP_TOUCH to V4L2_CAP_TOUCH_CAPTURE.
- Touch devices should register both V4L2_CAP_VIDEO_CAPTURE and
V4L2_CAP_TOUCH_CAPTURE.
- Get rid of V4L2_BUF_TYPE_TOUCH_CAPTURE and use
V4L2_BUF_TYPE_VIDEO_CAPTURE. In v4l2-ioctl.c if we need to force particular
pix formats for touch, it will need to look at V4L2_CAP_TOUCH_CAPTURE.
Your other review comments look straightforward to address - thanks.
I should say, you can see my current changes to v4l2-compliance here:
https://github.com/ndyer/v4l-utils/commit/07e00c33
Should I post them along with the kernel patches next time?
>
> I can imagine an embedded usb gadget device that outputs touch data to a PC.
>
> Regards,
>
> Hans
Powered by blists - more mailing lists