Hi Helen, Ezequiel, The merge window is open, so you want to get this in, then please post a v12 with the few remaining items addressed so that I can merge it. Regards, Hans On 11/19/19 9:30 AM, Hans Verkuil wrote: > On 11/18/19 7:52 PM, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: >> 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. > > Fair enough! Just as long as it is mentioned somewhere. > >> >>> 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. > > Thanks! > > Remember that we are in the code freeze until v5.5-rc1 is released, > so you have time to make more adjustments if you want to. > > Regards, > > Hans > >> >>> It passes all the sparse/smatch tests, so that's very good. >>> >> >> Great! >> >> Thanks, >> Ezequiel >> >
