[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240412182026.GJ31122@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 21:20:26 +0300
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
To: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...asonboard.com>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
Umang Jain <umang.jain@...asonboard.com>,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 7/9] media: subdev: Support privacy led in
v4l2_subdev_enable/disable_streams()
Hi Tomi,
Thank you for the patch.
On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 03:35:54PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> We support camera privacy leds with the .s_stream, in call_s_stream, but
s/the .s_stream/the .s_stream() operation/
> we don't have that support when the subdevice implements
> .enable/disable_streams.
>
> Add the support by enabling the led when the first stream for a
> subdevice is enabled, and disabling the led then the last stream is
> disabled.
I wonder if that will always be the correct constraint for all devices,
but I suppose we can worry about it later.
> Signed-off-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...asonboard.com>
> ---
> drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-subdev.c | 9 +++++++++
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-subdev.c b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-subdev.c
> index 20b5a00cbeeb..f44aaa4e1fab 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-subdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-subdev.c
> @@ -2150,6 +2150,7 @@ int v4l2_subdev_enable_streams(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u32 pad,
> {
> struct device *dev = sd->entity.graph_obj.mdev->dev;
> struct v4l2_subdev_state *state;
> + bool already_streaming;
> u64 found_streams = 0;
> unsigned int i;
> int ret;
> @@ -2198,6 +2199,8 @@ int v4l2_subdev_enable_streams(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u32 pad,
>
> dev_dbg(dev, "enable streams %u:%#llx\n", pad, streams_mask);
>
> + already_streaming = v4l2_subdev_is_streaming(sd);
> +
> /* Call the .enable_streams() operation. */
> ret = v4l2_subdev_call(sd, pad, enable_streams, state, pad,
> streams_mask);
> @@ -2216,6 +2219,9 @@ int v4l2_subdev_enable_streams(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u32 pad,
> cfg->enabled = true;
> }
>
> + if (!already_streaming)
> + v4l2_subdev_enable_privacy_led(sd);
> +
> done:
> v4l2_subdev_unlock_state(state);
>
> @@ -2340,6 +2346,9 @@ int v4l2_subdev_disable_streams(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u32 pad,
> }
>
> done:
> + if (!v4l2_subdev_is_streaming(sd))
Wouldn't it be more efficient to check this while looping over the
stream configs in the loop just above ? Same for
v4l2_subdev_enable_streams().
> + v4l2_subdev_disable_privacy_led(sd);
> +
> v4l2_subdev_unlock_state(state);
>
> return ret;
>
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
Powered by blists - more mailing lists