linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 2/3] media: rockchip: Add a driver for Rockchip's camera interface

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, 22 Nov 2023 14:39:41 +0100
From:   Michael Riesch <michael.riesch@...fvision.net>
To:     Tommaso Merciai <tomm.merciai@...il.com>
Cc:     Mehdi Djait <mehdi.djait@...tlin.com>, mchehab@...nel.org,
        heiko@...ech.de, hverkuil-cisco@...all.nl,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        conor+dt@...nel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com, alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com,
        maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com, paul.kocialkowski@...tlin.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 2/3] media: rockchip: Add a driver for Rockchip's
 camera interface

Hi Paul, Tommaso,

On 11/22/23 14:33, Tommaso Merciai wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> Thanks for your comment.
> 
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 01:42:50PM +0100, Michael Riesch wrote:
>> Hi Tommaso,
>>
>> On 11/21/23 19:41, Tommaso Merciai wrote:
>>> Hi Mehdi,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 12:04:39PM +0100, Mehdi Djait wrote:
>>>> This introduces a V4L2 driver for the Rockchip CIF video capture controller.
>>>>
>>>> This controller supports multiple parallel interfaces, but for now only the
>>>> BT.656 interface could be tested, hence it's the only one that's supported
>>>> in the first version of this driver.
>>>>
>>>> This controller can be found on RK3066, PX30, RK1808, RK3128 and RK3288,
>>>> but for now it's only been tested on the PX30.
>>>>
>>>> CIF is implemented as a video node-centric driver.
>>>>
>>>> Most of this driver was written following the BSP driver from rockchip,
>>>> removing the parts that either didn't fit correctly the guidelines, or that
>>>> couldn't be tested.
>>>>
>>>> This basic version doesn't support cropping nor scaling and is only
>>>> designed with one SDTV video decoder being attached to it at any time.
>>>>
>>>> This version uses the "pingpong" mode of the controller, which is a
>>>> double-buffering mechanism.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Mehdi Djait <mehdi.djait@...tlin.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  MAINTAINERS                                   |    7 +
>>>>  drivers/media/platform/rockchip/Kconfig       |    1 +
>>>>  drivers/media/platform/rockchip/Makefile      |    1 +
>>>>  drivers/media/platform/rockchip/cif/Kconfig   |   13 +
>>>>  drivers/media/platform/rockchip/cif/Makefile  |    3 +
>>>>  drivers/media/platform/rockchip/cif/capture.c | 1120 +++++++++++++++++
>>>>  drivers/media/platform/rockchip/cif/capture.h |   21 +
>>>>  drivers/media/platform/rockchip/cif/common.h  |  129 ++
>>>>  drivers/media/platform/rockchip/cif/dev.c     |  302 +++++
>>>>  drivers/media/platform/rockchip/cif/regs.h    |  127 ++
>>>>  10 files changed, 1724 insertions(+)
>>>>  create mode 100644 drivers/media/platform/rockchip/cif/Kconfig
>>>>  create mode 100644 drivers/media/platform/rockchip/cif/Makefile
>>>>  create mode 100644 drivers/media/platform/rockchip/cif/capture.c
>>>>  create mode 100644 drivers/media/platform/rockchip/cif/capture.h
>>>>  create mode 100644 drivers/media/platform/rockchip/cif/common.h
>>>>  create mode 100644 drivers/media/platform/rockchip/cif/dev.c
>>>>  create mode 100644 drivers/media/platform/rockchip/cif/regs.h
>>>
>>> Just a logigistic comment on my side for now, sorry :)
>>> What about use cif-* prefix in front of driver files?
>>>
>>> like:
>>>
>>> cif-capture.c
>>> cif-capture.h
>>> cif-common.h
>>> cif-dev.c
>>> cif-regs.h
>>
>> What would be the rationale here?
>>
>> IMHO the files are in a folder named cif, so adding this prefix seems
>> kind of redundant.
>>
>> That said, if there is a good reason I could live with cif-*.{c,h} as
>> well, of course. My only request would be to agree on something ASAP.
> 
> Others platform drivers are using this pattern prefix.
> Please check:
> 
> tree -l 2 ./drivers/media/platform/
> 
> Would be better for me to align with this common pattern.
> But this is my personal idea :)
> 
> Thanks & Regards,
> Tommaso
> 
>>
>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>> Tommaso
>>> [...]
>> Best regards,
>> Michael

Right, thanks for the explanations. No objections to renaming the files
to cif-*.{c,h} from my side, but let's get the naming discussions sorted
out quickly :-)

Best regards,
Michael