Hi,
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 11:50:02PM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> Hi Sebastian,
>
> Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 02:22:18PM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > Remove the loop in sub-device registration and create each sub-device
> > > explicitly instead.
> >
> > Reviewed-By: Sebastian Reichel <sre@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Thanks!
>
> >
> > > +static int smiapp_register_subdevs(struct smiapp_sensor *sensor)
> > > +{
> > > + int rval;
> > > +
> > > + if (sensor->scaler) {
> > > + rval = smiapp_register_subdev(
> > > + sensor, sensor->binner, sensor->scaler,
> > > + SMIAPP_PAD_SRC, SMIAPP_PAD_SINK,
> > > + MEDIA_LNK_FL_ENABLED | MEDIA_LNK_FL_IMMUTABLE);
> > > + if (rval < 0)
> > > return rval;
> > > - }
> > > }
> > >
> > > - return 0;
> > > + return smiapp_register_subdev(
> > > + sensor, sensor->pixel_array, sensor->binner,
> > > + SMIAPP_PA_PAD_SRC, SMIAPP_PAD_SINK,
> > > + MEDIA_LNK_FL_ENABLED | MEDIA_LNK_FL_IMMUTABLE);
> > > }
> >
> > I haven't looked at the remaining code, but is sensor->scaler
> > stuff being cleaned up properly if the binner part fails?
>
> That's a very good question. I don't think it is. But that's how
> the code has always been
Yes, it's not a regression introduced by this patch, that's why I
gave Reviewed-By ;)
> --- there are issues left to be resolved if registered() fails for
> a reason or another. For instance, removing and reloading the
> omap3-isp module will cause a failure in the smiapp driver unless
> it's unloaded as well.
>
> I think I prefer to fix that in a different patch(set) as this one
> is quite large already.
ok.
-- Sebastian
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
