[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231220130236.GN29638@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2023 15:02:36 +0200
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
To: Tommaso Merciai <tomm.merciai@...il.com>
Cc: linuxfancy@...glegroups.com, sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com,
martin.hecht@...et.eu, Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] media: i2c: alvium: fix req_fr check into
alvium_s_frame_interval()
Hi Tommaso,
Thank you for the patch.
On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 01:40:23PM +0100, Tommaso Merciai wrote:
> Actually req_fr check into alvium_s_frame_interval() is wrong.
> In particular req_fr can't be >=max and <= min at the same time.
> Fix this using clamp and remove dft_fr parameter from
> alvium_get_frame_interval() not more used.
The commit message should have explained why clamping is better than
picking a default value, as that's a functional change. If you propose
an updated commit message in a reply, I think Sakari can update the
patch when applying the series to his tree, there's no need for a v4.
> Signed-off-by: Tommaso Merciai <tomm.merciai@...il.com>
Reviewed-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
> ---
> drivers/media/i2c/alvium-csi2.c | 12 ++++--------
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/alvium-csi2.c b/drivers/media/i2c/alvium-csi2.c
> index 240bf991105e..01111a00902d 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/alvium-csi2.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/alvium-csi2.c
> @@ -1171,12 +1171,10 @@ static int alvium_set_bayer_pattern(struct alvium_dev *alvium,
> }
>
> static int alvium_get_frame_interval(struct alvium_dev *alvium,
> - u64 *dft_fr, u64 *min_fr, u64 *max_fr)
> + u64 *min_fr, u64 *max_fr)
> {
> int ret = 0;
>
> - alvium_read(alvium, REG_BCRM_ACQUISITION_FRAME_RATE_RW,
> - dft_fr, &ret);
> alvium_read(alvium, REG_BCRM_ACQUISITION_FRAME_RATE_MIN_R,
> min_fr, &ret);
> alvium_read(alvium, REG_BCRM_ACQUISITION_FRAME_RATE_MAX_R,
> @@ -1647,7 +1645,7 @@ 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;
> + u64 req_fr, min_fr, max_fr;
> struct v4l2_fract *interval;
> int ret;
>
> @@ -1657,7 +1655,7 @@ static int alvium_s_frame_interval(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
> if (fi->interval.denominator == 0)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - ret = alvium_get_frame_interval(alvium, &dft_fr, &min_fr, &max_fr);
> + ret = alvium_get_frame_interval(alvium, &min_fr, &max_fr);
> if (ret) {
> dev_err(dev, "Fail to get frame interval\n");
> return ret;
> @@ -1670,9 +1668,7 @@ static int alvium_s_frame_interval(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
>
> req_fr = (u64)((fi->interval.denominator * USEC_PER_SEC) /
> fi->interval.numerator);
> -
> - if (req_fr >= max_fr && req_fr <= min_fr)
> - req_fr = dft_fr;
> + req_fr = clamp(req_fr, min_fr, max_fr);
>
> interval = v4l2_subdev_state_get_interval(sd_state, 0);
>
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
Powered by blists - more mailing lists