> Hi Sakari,
>
> Em Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:40:32 +0300
> Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxx> escreveu:
>
>> > So, I decided to send you this email, c/c a random list of people that
>> I
>> > believe are involved on the submit and/or review process of those
>> patches, in
>> > the hope to better understand and to discuss what's happening and how
>> can we
>> > speedup the merge process of those patches.
>>
>> There are a few reasons for apparent stalling of the development
>> process. I should have sent a status update earlier.
>>
>> The code quality of the ISP driver was originally quite low and from
>> that part it wouldn't have made much sense to repeatedly post that for
>> reviewing. It's been improving since many of the subdrivers have been
>> refactored or rewritten since I last posted the patchset. The end result
>> should be (more?) easily understood by human beings...
>
> Ok, makes sense.
>
>> Another reason for no upstream patches is that we are still depending on
>> the obsolete v4l2-int-device in the camera / sensor / lens / flash
>> driver interface. Hans' opinion was that we must switch to v4l2_subdev
>> instead with which I fully agree. However, due to our internal reasons
>> we have not been able to even start that transition process yet.
>>
>> There is no definite deadline for the v4l2_subdev transition (or even
>> its start) at the moment. I'm planning to update the patchset in
>> Gitorious, however.
>
> I also see advantages on porting it to v4l2 dev/subdev. However, I don't
> see
> much sense on holding a driver for such a long time just because an
> internal
> KABI, especially since the old v4l2-int-device is still supported, and
> provided
> that you'll do the conversion anyway.
That part is very important. The tvp514x driver went in while still using
v4l2-int-device, but the deal was that it would be converted as soon as
possible, in principle before the next kernel release. That was indeed the
case (and I'll prepare a pull request for that tomorrow), so I was OK with
it.
So if we accept other v4l2-int-device drivers, then only if we have a
solid agreement on when they will be converted to v4l2_subdev. It is very
tempting to postpone that once a driver is in, but the only way we can
have real reuse of i2c drivers is if they all use the same API.
Just my 5 cents...
Regards,
Hans
>
> Whatever you decide, it is up to you do choose the proper snapshot where
> you
> consider the code ready for the merge submission.
>
> Just be nice with me by avoid sending me all drivers at the same time, on
> big
> pull requests ;)
>
> Cheers,
> Mauro
>
--
Hans Verkuil - video4linux developer - sponsored by TANDBERG
--
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
