Hi Yong, On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 02:21:20PM +0800, Yong wrote: > On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 07:49:23 +0300 > Baruch Siach <baruch@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 09:22:49AM +0800, Yong wrote: > > > I am waiting for more comments for the sunxi-csi.h. It's pleasure if > > > you have any suggestions about it. > > > > You mean sunxi_csi.h, right? > > Yes. My spelling mistake. > > > Why do you need the sunxi_csi_ops indirection? Do you expect to add > > alternative implementations of these ops at some point? > > I want to seperate the sunxi_video.c and sunxi_csi_v3s.c. > sunxi_csi_v3s.c is Soc specific. Maybe there will be sunxi_csi_r40.c > in the futrue. But the sunxi_video.c and sunxi_csi.c are common. I'd say it is a premature optimization. The file separation is fine, IMO, but the added csi_ops indirection makes the code less readable. Someone with access to R40 hardware with CSI setup would be a better position to abstract the platform specific code. But I'd defer to the media maintainers on that. Thanks, baruch -- http://baruch.siach.name/blog/ ~. .~ Tk Open Systems =}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{= - baruch@xxxxxxxxxx - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il - -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html