On Sat, 6 Jun 2009, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> On Saturday 06 June 2009 13:59:19 Hans Verkuil wrote:
> > I propose to change the API as follows:
> >
> > #define V4L2_I2C_ADDRS(addr, addrs...) \
> > ((const unsigned short []){ addr, ## addrs, I2C_CLIENT_END })
> >
> > struct v4l2_subdev *v4l2_i2c_new_subdev(struct v4l2_device *v4l2_dev,
> > struct i2c_adapter *adapter,
> > const char *module_name, const char *client_type,
> > u8 addr, const unsigned short *addrs);
> >
> > struct v4l2_subdev *v4l2_i2c_new_subdev_cfg(struct v4l2_device *v4l2_dev,
> > struct i2c_adapter *adapter,
> > const char *module_name, const char *client_type,
> > int irq, void *platform_data,
> > u8 addr, const unsigned short *addrs);
> >
> > /* Only available for kernels >= 2.6.26 */
> > struct v4l2_subdev *v4l2_i2c_new_subdev_board(struct v4l2_device
> > *v4l2_dev, struct i2c_adapter *adapter, const char *module_name, struct
> > i2c_board_info *info, const unsigned short *addrs);
Maybe "addrs" could be changed to something like "probed_addrs" so it's
easier to tell that the two address fields are used differently?
Is v4l2_i2c_new_subdev() in effect just a wrapper around
v4l2_i2c_new_subdev_cfg() that calls it with NO_IRQ and NULL for irq and
platform_data?
And could v4l2_i2c_new_subdev_cfg() be done like this?
struct v4l2_subdev *v4l2_i2c_new_subdev_cfg(struct v4l2_device *v4l2_dev,
struct i2c_adapter *adapter, const char *module_name,
const char *client_type, int irq, void *platform_data,
u8 addr, const unsigned short *addrs)
{
struct i2c_board_info info = {
.addr = addr, .platform_data = platform_data, .irq = irq, };
strlcpy(info.type, client_type, sizeof(info.type));
return v4l2_i2c_new_subdev_board(v4l2_dev, adapter, module_name,
&info, addrs);
}
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
