Hello Thierry, 2015-11-19 12:51 GMT+01:00 Thierry Reding <treding@xxxxxxxxxx>: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 11:55:53PM +0100, Enric Balletbo Serra wrote: >> Hello Thierry, >> >> 2015-11-17 13:55 GMT+01:00 Thierry Reding <treding@xxxxxxxxxx>: >> > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 05:28:24PM +0100, Enric Balletbo Serra wrote: >> >> Hello Thierry, >> >> >> >> Many thanks for your comments. >> >> >> >> 2015-11-16 12:50 GMT+01:00 Thierry Reding <treding@xxxxxxxxxx>: >> >> > On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 07:38:19PM +0100, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote: >> >> >> The MPEG Source (MS) InfoFrame is in EIA/CEA-861B. It describes aspects of >> >> >> the compressed video stream that were used to produce the uncompressed >> >> >> video. >> >> >> >> >> >> The patch adds functions to work with MPEG InfoFrames. >> >> >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> >> --- >> >> >> drivers/video/hdmi.c | 156 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> >> include/linux/hdmi.h | 24 ++++++++ >> >> >> 2 files changed, 180 insertions(+) >> >> > >> >> > According to the CEA specification a source is expected to send this >> >> > type of infoframe once per video frame. I'm curious how you envision >> >> > this to be ensured. Would hardware provide a mechanism to store this >> >> > data and send the infoframe automatically? How would you ensure that >> >> > updates sent to the hardware match the upcoming frame? >> >> > >> >> >> >> To be honest I'm not sure if I have the full picture. In the use case >> >> I'm trying there is a hardware mechanism to store the data and send >> >> the infoframe through a "Packet Send Control Register". >> > >> > Okay, sounds like the hardware will automatically send out packets at >> > the right time. That still leaves open the issue of how to ensure this >> > is synchronized with userspace. Perhaps this could be done by attaching >> > a property to a framebuffer, so that we'd know what exact frame the meta >> > data is attached to and when to update the FIFOs for the infoframe. >> > >> > Usually it's a good idea to send this type of patch as part of a larger >> > series precisely so that people can see how it is used. That should make >> > it easier to see if this is good enough or needs some more thought on >> > how to synchronize. Do you have any code that you could post that makes >> > use of this new infoframe? >> > >> >> I was thinking use this and other helpers in the anx7814 bridge >> driver[1], I thought that this patch should go through another tree, >> this is the reason why I send it separately, but If you want or you >> prefer I can send as part of these patch series. >> >> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/11/13/284 > > I haven't seen those patches yet. I should've been Cc'ed on those > patches since I'm technically the maintainer of drm/bridge. Did the > get_maintainer.pl script not list me? > Mmm, just checked and yes, get_maintainer list you, so probably I did something getting the maintainers. Sorry. > In my opinion, it's usually a good idea to keep all dependencies in a > single series, just so people get a better picture of what you're > submitting. Of course that's just my opinion, somebody else may yell at > you because they get Cc'ed on patches that they're not interested in... > > As for merging patches, it's usually best to let maintainers figure that > out once the series is in good shape. > > Thierry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fbdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
