linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v5 13/14] media: tegra-video: Add CSI MIPI pads calibration

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

Date:   Wed, 29 Jul 2020 18:06:40 -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 5:53 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> 30.07.2020 03:55, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет:
>> 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() ?
> Yes, and tegra_csi_s_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;
> Readability should be more important than number of lines.

Will have v6 and add additional patch at the end to do enable/disable 
separately.

Separating this out with additional patch before adding sensor support 
patch requires all patches to be updated.

So I am ok either ways. Please let me know if adding additional patch at 
the end to split tegra_channel_set_stream() and tegra_csi_s_stream() 
separately is ok?