Hi Hans, Thanks for taking care of this. On Thu, 2019-11-14 at 09:42 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: > On 11/14/19 6:12 AM, Helen Koike wrote: > > Hello, > > > > This series adds the Rockchip Image Signal Processing Unit v1 driver to > > staging. > > > > The main reason to be in staging is that people are already using it from the > > mailing list (including libcamera), and having it in mainline makes the workflow > > easier. Also, it is easier for other people to contribute back (with code > > or testing the driver). > > > > We plan to actively work on this driver to get it our of staging. > > > > This patchset is also available at: > > https://gitlab.collabora.com/koike/linux/tree/rockchip/isp/v11 > > > > Libcamera patched to work with this version: > > https://gitlab.collabora.com/koike/libcamera > > (also sent to the mailing list) > > > > The major difference in v11 are: > > - Fixed compiling warnings found with W=1 > > - Fixed checkpatch errors > > - Add clock-names values in dt-bindings > > Looking at checkpatch I see a few remaining issues that I believe should be > fixed before merging this: > > CHECK: spinlock_t definition without comment > #575: FILE: drivers/staging/media/rkisp1/isp_stats.h:43: > + spinlock_t irq_lock; > > CHECK: struct mutex definition without comment > #581: FILE: drivers/staging/media/rkisp1/isp_stats.h:49: > + struct mutex wq_lock; > > CHECK: spinlock_t definition without comment > #1648: FILE: drivers/staging/media/rkisp1/isp_params.h:25: > + spinlock_t config_lock; > > CHECK: spinlock_t definition without comment > #2058: FILE: drivers/staging/media/rkisp1/capture.h:145: > + spinlock_t vbq_lock; > I'd rather merge this as-is, adding a TODO entry stating we need to revisit locking specifically, because I'd like to take a close look at these spinlocks/mutex, instead of just addding comments for then. > Once this is done together with the Jacob Chen email clarification > it is ready to be merged for v5.6. > I'll find out more about this. > It passes all the sparse/smatch tests, so that's very good. > Great! Thanks, Ezequiel
