[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f5440f57-3653-7cf0-9efe-e9a0c276f7cf@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 17:55:48 -0700
From: Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@...dia.com>
To: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>, <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
<jonathanh@...dia.com>, <frankc@...dia.com>, <hverkuil@...all.nl>,
<sakari.ailus@....fi>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
<helen.koike@...labora.com>
CC: <sboyd@...nel.org>, <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
<linux-media@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 13/14] media: tegra-video: Add CSI MIPI pads
calibration
On 7/29/20 5:52 PM, Sowjanya Komatineni wrote:
>
> On 7/29/20 5:43 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> 30.07.2020 03:27, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет:
>> ...
>>>>> Secondly, perhaps a failed calibration isn't a very critical error?
>>>>> Hence just printing a warning message should be enough.
>>>> Using dev_err to report calibration failure. Are you suggesting to use
>>>> dev_warn instead of dev_err?
>> I meant that failing s_stream might be unnecessary.
>>
>> The dev_warn should be more appropriate for a non-critical errors.
>>
>>>>> Could you please make a patch that factors all ON/OFF code paths
>>>>> into a
>>>>> separate functions? It's a bit difficult to follow the combined code,
>>>>> especially partial changes in the patches. Thanks in advance!
>>>> what do you mean by partial changes in patches?
>>>>
>>>> Can you please be more clear?
>>> Also please specify what ON/OFF code paths you are referring to when
>>> you
>>> say to move into separate functions?
>> I meant to change all the code like this:
>>
>> set(on) {
>> if (on) {
>> ...
>> return;
>> }
>>
>> if (!on)
>> ...
>>
>> return;
>> }
>>
>> to somewhat like this:
>>
>> set(on) {
>> if (on)
>> ret = enable();
>> else
>> ret = disable();
>>
>> return ret;
>> }
>
> You mean to change tegra_channel_set_stream() ?
changing tegra_channel_set_stream() to have like below will have
redundant calls as most of the code b/w enable and disable is same
except calling them in reverse order based on on/off and doing MIPI
calibration only during ON
if (on)
ret = enable()
else
ret = disable()
return ret;
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists