Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 08/08/2016 09:30 PM, Robert Jarzmik wrote: >> This is to be seen as a regression as the set_crop function is >> removed. This is a temporary situation in the v4l2 porting, and will >> have to be added later. > > This is a bit confusing, since in the next patch you say in the commit log: > > - the s_crop() call was removed, judged not working > (see what happens soc_camera_s_crop() when get_crop() == NULL) > > So the set_crop removal isn't temporary after all? It isn't added back in > this patch series. > > Note that I am OK with removing set_crop if it never worked reliably, but > then the commit log of this patch should be updated to reflect that. Well, it's temporary in the sense "I have not added it back yet, but I commit to add it back within 2 or 3 kernel cycles" As for the confusion, I think the pxa_camera + mt9m111 set_crop() was not working, but I didn't say that another camera host + mt9m111 didn't work. I think set_crop() is not working because pxa_camera lacks code, but that doesn't prevent mt9m111 to have a set_crop() sensor working implementation. That's why I say I'm probably adding a regression, and commit to remove it soon ... Cheers. -- Robert -- 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
