On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:33 PM, Karicheri, Muralidharan<m-karicheri2@xxxxxx> wrote: > > <snip> >>> >>> [MK]In that case can't the driver just ignore the field polarity? I >>assume that drivers implement the parameter that has support in hardware. >>So it is not an issue. >> >>No, because the same driver runs on hardware that also has the field >>signal. So we need to be able to give information about which signals >>that the board actually implement. We already do this with the >>soc_camera framework and it is working just fine. > > > Hardware with field signal used (driver use polarity from platform data and set it in the hardware) > Hardware with field signal not used (In this case, even though the driver sets it in the hardware, it is not really used in the hardware design and hence is a don't care. right? > > So I don't see why it matters. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you are trying to do. But how can the camera sensor driver check if the field signal is present or not? The camera sensor driver may need information if a pin is present or not for some decision? Perhaps for hardware configuration? A good example IMO is the tw9910 driver and the mpout signal. Right now the mpout configuration is part of the platform data, but maybe it would make more sense to allow the driver to check if field is used on the platform and if so configure the pin accordingly. / magnus -- 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
