Hi Niklas, On Wednesday, 20 December 2017 17:20:55 EET Niklas Söderlund wrote: > On 2017-12-14 17:50:24 +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Thursday, 14 December 2017 16:25:00 EET Sakari Ailus wrote: > >> On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 10:17:36AM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >>> On Friday, 8 December 2017 03:08:21 EET Niklas Söderlund wrote: > >>>> The rcar-vin driver needs to be part of a media controller to > >>>> support Gen3. Give each VIN instance a unique name so it can be > >>>> referenced from userspace. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Niklas Söderlund > >>>> <niklas.soderlund+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Reviewed-by: Kieran Bingham > >>>> <kieran.bingham+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Reviewed-by: Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>> --- > >>>> > >>>> drivers/media/platform/rcar-vin/rcar-v4l2.c | 3 ++- > >>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/rcar-vin/rcar-v4l2.c > >>>> b/drivers/media/platform/rcar-vin/rcar-v4l2.c index > >>>> 59ec6d3d119590aa..19de99133f048960 100644 > >>>> --- a/drivers/media/platform/rcar-vin/rcar-v4l2.c > >>>> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/rcar-vin/rcar-v4l2.c > >>>> @@ -876,7 +876,8 @@ int rvin_v4l2_register(struct rvin_dev *vin) > >>>> vdev->fops = &rvin_fops; > >>>> vdev->v4l2_dev = &vin->v4l2_dev; > >>>> vdev->queue = &vin->queue; > >>>> - strlcpy(vdev->name, KBUILD_MODNAME, sizeof(vdev->name)); > >>>> + snprintf(vdev->name, sizeof(vdev->name), "%s %s", KBUILD_MODNAME, > >>>> + dev_name(vin->dev)); > >>> > >>> Do we need the module name here ? How about calling them "%s output", > >>> dev_name(vin->dev) to emphasize the fact that this is a video node and > >>> not a VIN subdev ? This is what the omap3isp and vsp1 drivers do. > >>> > >>> We're suffering a bit from the fact that V4L2 has never standardized a > >>> naming scheme for the devices. It wouldn't be fair to ask you to fix > >>> that as a prerequisite to get the VIN driver merged, but we clearly have > >>> to work on that at some point. > >> > >> Agreed, this needs to be stable and I think aligning to what omap3isp or > >> vsp1 do would be a good fix here. > > > > Even omap3isp and vsp1 are not fully aligned, so I think we need to design > > a naming policy and document it. > > I agree that align this is a good idea. And for this reason I chosen to > update this patch as such: > > "%s output", dev_name(vin->dev) Wouldn't it be easier for userspace to use "VIN%u output", index where index is the VIN index as specified in DT ? > I hope this is a step in the correct direction. If not please let me > know as soon as possible so I can minimize the trouble for the other > developers doing stuff on-top of this series and there test scripts :-) -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart
