| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <ZYAqyOEfKp/oiqs9@tom-HP-ZBook-Fury-15-G7-Mobile-Workstation>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2023 12:19:36 +0100
From: Tommaso Merciai <tomm.merciai@...il.com>
To: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Cc: linuxfancy@...glegroups.com, sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com,
Martin Hecht <martin.hecht@...et.eu>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] media: i2c: alvium: store frame interval in subdev
state
Hi Laurent,
Thanks for your quick reply.
On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 01:03:31PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 11:30:38AM +0100, Tommaso Merciai wrote:
> > Hi Laurent,
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 04:59:05AM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > Hi Tommaso,
> > >
> > > Thank you for the patch.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 09:24:52AM +0100, Tommaso Merciai wrote:
> > > > Use the newly added storage for frame interval in the subdev state to
> > > > simplify the driver.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Tommaso Merciai <tomm.merciai@...il.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/media/i2c/alvium-csi2.c | 40 ++++++++++-----------------------
> > > > drivers/media/i2c/alvium-csi2.h | 2 --
> > > > 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/alvium-csi2.c b/drivers/media/i2c/alvium-csi2.c
> > > > index fde456357be1..81f683b3c849 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/media/i2c/alvium-csi2.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/alvium-csi2.c
> > > > @@ -1643,25 +1643,6 @@ static int alvium_hw_init(struct alvium_dev *alvium)
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > /* --------------- Subdev Operations --------------- */
> > > > -
> > > > -static int alvium_g_frame_interval(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
> > > > - struct v4l2_subdev_state *sd_state,
> > > > - struct v4l2_subdev_frame_interval *fi)
> > > > -{
> > > > - struct alvium_dev *alvium = sd_to_alvium(sd);
> > > > -
> > > > - /*
> > > > - * FIXME: Implement support for V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_TRY, using the V4L2
> > > > - * subdev active state API.
> > > > - */
> > > > - if (fi->which != V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_ACTIVE)
> > > > - return -EINVAL;
> > > > -
> > > > - fi->interval = alvium->frame_interval;
> > > > -
> > > > - return 0;
> > > > -}
> > > > -
> > > > static int alvium_s_frame_interval(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
> > > > struct v4l2_subdev_state *sd_state,
> > > > struct v4l2_subdev_frame_interval *fi)
> > > > @@ -1669,6 +1650,7 @@ static int alvium_s_frame_interval(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
> > > > struct alvium_dev *alvium = sd_to_alvium(sd);
> > > > struct device *dev = &alvium->i2c_client->dev;
> > > > u64 req_fr, dft_fr, min_fr, max_fr;
> > > > + struct v4l2_fract *interval;
> > > > int ret;
> > > >
> > > > /*
> > >
> > > You should drop the FIXME comment here and the ACTIVE check...
> >
> > Oks, thanks.
> >
> > >
> > > > @@ -1701,9 +1683,10 @@ static int alvium_s_frame_interval(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
> > > > if (req_fr >= max_fr && req_fr <= min_fr)
> > > > req_fr = dft_fr;
> > > >
> > > > - alvium->fr = req_fr;
> > > > - alvium->frame_interval.numerator = fi->interval.numerator;
> > > > - alvium->frame_interval.denominator = fi->interval.denominator;
> > > > + interval = v4l2_subdev_state_get_interval(sd_state, 0);
> > > > +
> > > > + interval->numerator = fi->interval.numerator;
> > > > + interval->denominator = fi->interval.denominator;
> > > >
> > >
> > > ... and here only call alvium_set_frame_rate() for the ACTIVE frame
> > > interval.
> >
> > I don't completely got this comment, can you give me more details about
> > please. Thanks in advance!
>
> alvium_s_frame_interval() can be called both for the TRY and ACTIVE
> status. The hardware registers should be written only for the ACTIVE
> state.
Do you think could be sufficient an if check like this?
- return alvium_set_frame_rate(alvium, req_fr);
+ if (fi->which == V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_ACTIVE)
+ return alvium_set_frame_rate(alvium, req_fr);
+
+ return ret;
}
Thanks & Regards,
Tommaso
> > > > @@ -1853,6 +1836,7 @@ static int alvium_init_state(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
> > > > {
> > > > struct alvium_dev *alvium = sd_to_alvium(sd);
> > > > struct alvium_mode *mode = &alvium->mode;
> > > > + struct v4l2_fract *interval;
> > > > struct v4l2_subdev_format sd_fmt = {
> > > > .which = V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_TRY,
> > > > .format = alvium_csi2_default_fmt,
> > > > @@ -1870,6 +1854,11 @@ static int alvium_init_state(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
> > > > *v4l2_subdev_state_get_crop(state, 0) = sd_crop.rect;
> > > > *v4l2_subdev_state_get_format(state, 0) = sd_fmt.format;
> > > >
> > > > + /* Setup initial frame interval*/
> > > > + interval = v4l2_subdev_state_get_interval(state, 0);
> > > > + interval->numerator = 1;
> > > > + interval->denominator = ALVIUM_DEFAULT_FR_HZ;
> > > > +
> > > > return 0;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > @@ -2239,7 +2228,7 @@ static const struct v4l2_subdev_pad_ops alvium_pad_ops = {
> > > > .set_fmt = alvium_set_fmt,
> > > > .get_selection = alvium_get_selection,
> > > > .set_selection = alvium_set_selection,
> > > > - .get_frame_interval = alvium_g_frame_interval,
> > > > + .get_frame_interval = v4l2_subdev_get_frame_interval,
> > > > .set_frame_interval = alvium_s_frame_interval,
> > > > };
> > > >
> > > > @@ -2260,11 +2249,6 @@ static int alvium_subdev_init(struct alvium_dev *alvium)
> > > > struct v4l2_subdev *sd = &alvium->sd;
> > > > int ret;
> > > >
> > > > - /* Setup initial frame interval*/
> > > > - alvium->frame_interval.numerator = 1;
> > > > - alvium->frame_interval.denominator = ALVIUM_DEFAULT_FR_HZ;
> > > > - alvium->fr = ALVIUM_DEFAULT_FR_HZ;
> > > > -
> > > > /* Setup the initial mode */
> > > > alvium->mode.fmt = alvium_csi2_default_fmt;
> > > > alvium->mode.width = alvium_csi2_default_fmt.width;
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/alvium-csi2.h b/drivers/media/i2c/alvium-csi2.h
> > > > index a6529b28e7dd..f5e26257b042 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/media/i2c/alvium-csi2.h
> > > > +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/alvium-csi2.h
> > > > @@ -442,8 +442,6 @@ struct alvium_dev {
> > > > s32 inc_sharp;
> > > >
> > > > struct alvium_mode mode;
> > > > - struct v4l2_fract frame_interval;
> > > > - u64 fr;
> > >
> > > The fr field should have been removed by a previous patch (the one that
> > > will go between 1/3 an 2/3, see my review of 1/3) as shown by the fact
> > > that this patch only removes two locations where the field is set but
> > > none where it's read.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > u8 h_sup_csi_lanes;
> > > > u64 link_freq;
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Laurent Pinchart
Powered by blists - more mailing lists