[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0e64b778-e4ff-4b2f-9864-b5d58f642e0e@collabora.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2023 16:41:51 +0100
From: Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...labora.com>
To: Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>, mchehab@...nel.org,
tfiga@...omium.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, kernel@...labora.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] videobuf2: core: Rename min_buffers_needed field
to vb2_queue
Le 13/12/2023 à 17:39, Hans Verkuil a écrit :
> Hi Benjamin,
>
> On 11/12/2023 14:32, Benjamin Gaignard wrote:
>> Rename min_buffers_needed into min_queued_buffers and update
>> the documentation about it.
> I merged this patch, but not the others. I also dropped one functional
> change:
>
> <snip>
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/media/common/videobuf2/videobuf2-core.c b/drivers/media/common/videobuf2/videobuf2-core.c
>> index 40d89f29fa33..8912dff5bde3 100644
>> --- a/drivers/media/common/videobuf2/videobuf2-core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/media/common/videobuf2/videobuf2-core.c
>> @@ -865,7 +865,7 @@ int vb2_core_reqbufs(struct vb2_queue *q, enum vb2_memory memory,
>> /*
>> * Make sure the requested values and current defaults are sane.
>> */
>> - num_buffers = max_t(unsigned int, *count, q->min_buffers_needed);
>> + num_buffers = max_t(unsigned int, *count, q->min_queued_buffers + 1);
>> num_buffers = min_t(unsigned int, num_buffers, q->max_num_buffers);
>> memset(q->alloc_devs, 0, sizeof(q->alloc_devs));
>> /*
> That "+ 1" didn't really belong here, since everything else was just renaming a
> field. Such a patch shouldn't make any other changes.
>
> There were also three more occurrences of min_buffers_needed (one in a comment,
> two in a vivid function argument), and I renamed those as well.
>
> 'git grep min_buffers_needed' now no longer shows any hits.
>
> I decided not to take the other patches, I think it is best if you rebase
> and repost the series on top of staging and in the new year we'll continue with
> it. I did not feel that I had enough time to really review the remaining patches.
Do you want me to re-post only the two missing patches or should I add the patches for
delete buffers feature since it is the ultimate goal of this ?
Regards,
Benjamin
>
> However, it is nice to have this large rename patch merged. It touches on a lot
> of files, so it is annoying to have to carry that around. And now was a good
> moment to merge it.
>
> Regards,
>
> Hans
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists