On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:42:16PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > Thanks for the update. > > > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 01:24:51PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > > ... > > > +static int et8ek8_set_ctrl(struct v4l2_ctrl *ctrl) > > > +{ > > > + struct et8ek8_sensor *sensor = > > > + container_of(ctrl->handler, struct et8ek8_sensor, ctrl_handler); > > > + > > > + switch (ctrl->id) { > > > + case V4L2_CID_GAIN: > > > + return et8ek8_set_gain(sensor, ctrl->val); > > > + > > > + case V4L2_CID_EXPOSURE: > > > + { > > > + int rows; > > > + struct i2c_client *client = v4l2_get_subdevdata(&sensor->subdev); > > > + rows = ctrl->val; > > > + return et8ek8_i2c_write_reg(client, ET8EK8_REG_16BIT, 0x1243, > > > + swab16(rows)); > > > > Why swab16()? Doesn't the et8ek8_i2c_write_reg() already do the right thing? > > > > 16-bit writes aren't used elsewhere... and the register address and value > > seem to have different endianness there, it looks like a bug to me in that > > function. > > I'm pretty sure I did not invent that swab16(). I checked, and > exposure seems to work properly. I tried swapping the bytes, but then > exposure did not seem to work. So this one seems to be correct. I can fix that too, but I have no device to test. In terms of how the hardware is controlled there should be no difference anyway. -- Sakari Ailus e-mail: sakari.ailus@xxxxxx XMPP: sailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- 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