From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 700C5C352AA for ; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 16:21:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 480FD21A4C for ; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 16:21:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="URRUtENB" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2389954AbfJAQVe (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Oct 2019 12:21:34 -0400 Received: from lelv0143.ext.ti.com ([198.47.23.248]:60148 "EHLO lelv0143.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2389941AbfJAQVd (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Oct 2019 12:21:33 -0400 Received: from fllv0035.itg.ti.com ([10.64.41.0]) by lelv0143.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x91GLU9D030216; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 11:21:30 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1569946890; bh=ghA2jDGV0YzDn9mMprH6TaxzoC8WBOvM6BZjdlbrvSQ=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=URRUtENBwgKcTk1PIBuoFDm+FY/YOtVn2cd3XBUXBbYK4oXT4EfYs7rPZc7Bn6k9D I2pgU/U9L2PLLLnEpDaGCFhgZ93aRQ04vlOWbPLlGWx2NwG5ijjKfpR9ZPW7cRenhi XLzE7vG2IfqCBUeP6GfjGZxwS/uObhPSOTBNbeNA= Received: from DLEE108.ent.ti.com (dlee108.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.38]) by fllv0035.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x91GLUHe041996; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 11:21:30 -0500 Received: from DLEE108.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.38) by DLEE108.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.38) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1713.5; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 11:21:19 -0500 Received: from lelv0327.itg.ti.com (10.180.67.183) by DLEE108.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.38) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1713.5 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 11:21:19 -0500 Received: from ti.com (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by lelv0327.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with SMTP id x91GLUra053045; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 11:21:30 -0500 Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2019 11:23:41 -0500 From: Benoit Parrot To: Sakari Ailus CC: Hans Verkuil , , , Subject: Re: [Patch 1/3] media: ov5640: add PIXEL_RATE control Message-ID: <20191001162341.f2o7ruar2nifl5ws@ti.com> References: <20190925152301.21645-1-bparrot@ti.com> <20190925152301.21645-2-bparrot@ti.com> <20191001075704.GA5449@paasikivi.fi.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191001075704.GA5449@paasikivi.fi.intel.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20171215 X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Sakari, Thanks for the review. Sakari Ailus wrote on Tue [2019-Oct-01 10:57:04 +0300]: > Hi Benoit, > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:22:59AM -0500, Benoit Parrot wrote: > > Add v4l2 controls to report the pixel rates of each mode. This is > > needed by some CSI2 receiver in order to perform proper DPHY > > configuration. > > > > Signed-off-by: Benoit Parrot > > --- > > drivers/media/i2c/ov5640.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/ov5640.c b/drivers/media/i2c/ov5640.c > > index 500d9bbff10b..c2a44f30d56e 100644 > > --- a/drivers/media/i2c/ov5640.c > > +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/ov5640.c > > @@ -193,6 +193,9 @@ struct ov5640_mode_info { > > > > struct ov5640_ctrls { > > struct v4l2_ctrl_handler handler; > > + struct { > > + struct v4l2_ctrl *pixel_rate; > > + }; > > struct { > > struct v4l2_ctrl *auto_exp; > > struct v4l2_ctrl *exposure; > > @@ -241,6 +244,7 @@ struct ov5640_dev { > > const struct ov5640_mode_info *last_mode; > > enum ov5640_frame_rate current_fr; > > struct v4l2_fract frame_interval; > > + u64 pixel_rate; > > > > struct ov5640_ctrls ctrls; > > > > @@ -2202,6 +2206,7 @@ static int ov5640_set_fmt(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, > > const struct ov5640_mode_info *new_mode; > > struct v4l2_mbus_framefmt *mbus_fmt = &format->format; > > struct v4l2_mbus_framefmt *fmt; > > + u64 rate; > > int ret; > > > > if (format->pad != 0) > > @@ -2233,6 +2238,12 @@ static int ov5640_set_fmt(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, > > if (mbus_fmt->code != sensor->fmt.code) > > sensor->pending_fmt_change = true; > > > > + rate = sensor->current_mode->vtot * sensor->current_mode->htot; > > + rate *= ov5640_framerates[sensor->current_fr]; > > + sensor->pixel_rate = rate; > > + > > + __v4l2_ctrl_s_ctrl_int64(sensor->ctrls.pixel_rate, > > + sensor->pixel_rate); > > out: > > mutex_unlock(&sensor->lock); > > return ret; > > @@ -2657,6 +2668,13 @@ static int ov5640_init_controls(struct ov5640_dev *sensor) > > /* we can use our own mutex for the ctrl lock */ > > hdl->lock = &sensor->lock; > > > > + /* Clock related controls */ > > + ctrls->pixel_rate = > > + v4l2_ctrl_new_std(hdl, ops, > > + V4L2_CID_PIXEL_RATE, 0, INT_MAX, 1, > > + 55969920); > > Could you calculate this value instead of using a seemingly random number? Yes I guess I could, especially if I make a helper function for it :). > > > + ctrls->pixel_rate->flags |= V4L2_CTRL_FLAG_READ_ONLY; > > + > > /* Auto/manual white balance */ > > ctrls->auto_wb = v4l2_ctrl_new_std(hdl, ops, > > V4L2_CID_AUTO_WHITE_BALANCE, > > @@ -2782,6 +2800,7 @@ static int ov5640_s_frame_interval(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, > > struct ov5640_dev *sensor = to_ov5640_dev(sd); > > const struct ov5640_mode_info *mode; > > int frame_rate, ret = 0; > > + u64 rate; > > > > if (fi->pad != 0) > > return -EINVAL; > > @@ -2816,6 +2835,12 @@ static int ov5640_s_frame_interval(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, > > sensor->frame_interval = fi->interval; > > sensor->current_mode = mode; > > sensor->pending_mode_change = true; > > + > > + rate = sensor->current_mode->vtot * sensor->current_mode->htot; > > + rate *= ov5640_framerates[sensor->current_fr]; > > + sensor->pixel_rate = rate; > > I think it'd be better to have a function to calculate the value instead of > duplicating the code here. Yes I'll create a helper function. Benoit > > > + __v4l2_ctrl_s_ctrl_int64(sensor->ctrls.pixel_rate, > > + sensor->pixel_rate); > > } > > out: > > mutex_unlock(&sensor->lock); > > -- > Kind regards, > > Sakari Ailus > sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com