2017-07-07 Shuah Khan <shuahkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On 06/16/2017 01:39 AM, Gustavo Padovan wrote: > > From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Instead of assigning the global v4l2 device, assign the specific device. > > This was causing trouble when using using V4L2 events with vivid > > devices. The device's queue should be the same we opened in userspace. > > > > Signed-off-by: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/media/platform/vivid/vivid-core.c | 10 +++++----- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/vivid/vivid-core.c b/drivers/media/platform/vivid/vivid-core.c > > index ef344b9..8843170 100644 > > --- a/drivers/media/platform/vivid/vivid-core.c > > +++ b/drivers/media/platform/vivid/vivid-core.c > > @@ -1070,7 +1070,7 @@ static int vivid_create_instance(struct platform_device *pdev, int inst) > > q->timestamp_flags = V4L2_BUF_FLAG_TIMESTAMP_MONOTONIC; > > q->min_buffers_needed = 2; > > q->lock = &dev->mutex; > > - q->dev = dev->v4l2_dev.dev; > > + q->dev = &dev->vid_cap_dev.dev; > > Does this work in all cases? My concern is that in some code paths > q->dev might be used to initiate release perhaps. > > Fore example v4l2_dev.release is vivid_dev_release() > dev->v4l2_dev.release = vivid_dev_release; > > vid_cap_dev release is video_device_release_empty > > This is one difference, but there might be others and the code paths > that might depend on q->dev being the v4l2_dev.dev which is the global > dev. Sure, I'll check this again. Gustavo
