linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] media: i2c: Copy mt9t112 soc

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180315162008.GA31710@w540>
Date:   Thu, 15 Mar 2018 17:20:08 +0100
From:   jacopo mondi <jacopo@...ndi.org>
To:     Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>
Cc:     Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@....fi>,
        Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@...ndi.org>,
        laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com, mchehab@...nel.org,
        linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] media: i2c: Copy mt9t112 soc_camera sensor driver

Hi Hans,

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 08:30:21AM -0700, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> On 03/15/2018 07:38 AM, jacopo mondi wrote:
> > Hi Sakari,
> >    thanks for looking into this!
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 01:35:34PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> >> Hi Jacopo,
> >>
> >> I wonder if it'd make sense to just make all the changes to the driver and
> >> then have it reviewed; I'm not sure the old driver can be said to have been
> >> in a known-good state that'd be useful to compare against. I think you did
> >> that with another driver as well.
> >>
> >
> > Well, I understand this is still debated, and I see your point.
> > As far as I can tell the driver had been developed to work with SH4
> > Ecovec boards and there tested.
> >
> > I'm not sure I fully got you here though. Are you proposing to
> > squash my next patch that cleans up the driver into this one and
> > propose it as a completely new driver to be reviewed from scratch?
> >
> > In the two previous driver I touched in this "remove soc_camera"
> > journey (ov772x and tw9910) I have followed this same pattern: copy
> > the soc_camera driver without removing the existing one, and pile on
> > top my changes/cleanups in another patch. Then port the board code to
> > use the new sensor driver, and the new CEU driver as well.
> >
> > Also, how would you like to proceed here? Hans sent a pull request for
> > the series, should I go with incremental changes on top of this?
>
> I don't want to postpone this conversion. The i2c/mt9t112.c is bug-compatible
> with i2c/soc-camera/mt9t112.c which is good enough for me. Being able to
> remove soc-camera in the (hopefully very) near future is the most important
> thing here.
>
> Once Jacopo can actually test the sensor, then that's a good time to review
> the driver in more detail.
>
> This reminded me that I actually started testing this sensor a year
> ago (I bought the same sensor on ebay, I completely forgot about that!).
>
> My attempt is here:
>
> https://git.linuxtv.org/hverkuil/media_tree.git/log/?h=mt9t112
>
> I never finished it because I had no documentation on the pinout and never
> got around to hooking my oscilloscope up to it to figure this out. I was
> testing this with the atmel-isc.c driver.
>
> This might be of some use to you, Jacopo, once you have the sensor.

Thanks for the info. I'll see what I can do. I don't have register
level document, and if the module is the same you have neither a
pinout description. This is going to be fun :/

I'll then refrain from sending more patches for this series/driver
until we cannot actually test the sensor, fixes apart, if any, of course.

Thanks
   j

>
> Regards,
>
> 	Hans

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)