On 06/01/2018 06:44 AM, Philipp Zabel wrote:
On Thu, 2018-05-31 at 17:30 -0700, Steve Longerbeam wrote:
<snip>
+
+.. code-block:: none
+
+ # Setup links
+ media-ctl -l "'adv7180 3-0021':0 -> 'ipu1_csi0_mux':1[1]"
+ media-ctl -l "'ipu1_csi0_mux':2 -> 'ipu1_csi0':0[1]"
+ media-ctl -l "'ipu1_csi0':2 -> 'ipu1_csi0 capture':0[1]"
+ # Configure pads
+ media-ctl -V "'adv7180 3-0021':0 [fmt:UYVY2X8/720x480 field:seq-bt]"
+ media-ctl -V "'ipu1_csi0_mux':2 [fmt:UYVY2X8/720x480]"
+ media-ctl -V "'ipu1_csi0':2 [fmt:AYUV32/720x480 field:interlaced]"
Could the example suggest using interlaced-bt to be explicit here?
Actually, I don't think we should allow interlaced on the CSI src pads
at all in this case. Technically it always writes either seq-tb or seq-
bt into the smfc, never interlaced (unless the input is already
interlaced).
Hmm, if the sink is 'alternate', and the requested source is
'interlaced*', perhaps we should allow the source to be
'interlaced*' and not override it. For example, if requested
is 'interlaced-tb', let it be that. IOW assume user knows something
we don't about the original field order, or is experimenting
with finding the correct field order.
Steve
