Hi Mauro, Hans, Sakari, On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 03:58:51PM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote: > Hi Hans, Mauro, > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 02:39:27PM +0200, Hans Verkuil wrote: > > On 10/19/18 14:31, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > > Em Fri, 19 Oct 2018 13:45:32 +0200 > > > Hans Verkuil <hansverk@xxxxxxxxx> escreveu: > > > > > >> On 10/19/18 13:43, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > >>> Those drivers are part of the legacy SoC camera framework. > > >>> They're being converted to not use it, but sometimes we're > > >>> keeping both legacy any new driver. > > >>> > > >>> This time, for example, we have two drivers on media with > > >>> the same name: ov772x. That's bad. > > >>> > > >>> So, in order to prevent that to happen, let's prepend the SoC > > >>> legacy drivers with soc_. > > >>> > > >>> No functional changes. > > >>> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@xxxxxxxxxx> > > >> > > >> Acked-by: Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > For now, let's just avoid the conflict if one builds both modules and > > > do a modprobe ov772x. > > > > > >> Let's kill all of these in the next kernel. I see no reason for keeping > > >> them around. > > > > > > While people are doing those SoC conversions, I would keep it. We > > > > Which people are doing SoC conversions? Nobody is using soc-camera anymore. > > It is a dead driver. The only reason it hasn't been removed yet is lack of > > time since it is not just removing the driver, but also patching old board > > files that use soc_camera headers. Really left-overs since the corresponding > > soc-camera drivers have long since been removed. > > > > > could move it to staging, to let it clear that those drivers require > > > conversion, and give people some time to work on it. > > > > There is nobody working on it. These are old sensors, and few will have > > the hardware to test it. If someone needs such a sensor driver, then they > > can always look at an older kernel version. It's still in git after all. > > > > Just kill it rather then polluting the media tree. > > I remember at least Jacopo has been doing some. There was someone else as > well, but I don't remember right now who it was. That said, I'm not sure if > there's anything happening to the rest. Yes, I did port a few drivers and there are patches for others coming. [PATCH v2 0/4] media: soc_camera: ov9640: switch driver to v4l2_async from Peter Cvek (now in Cc) > > Is there something that prevents removing these right away? As you said > it's not functional and people can always check old versions if they want > to port the driver to V4L2 sub-device framework. All dependencies should have been solved so far, but given that someone might want to do the porting at some point, I don't see how bad would it be to have them in staging, even if people could look into the git history... > > -- > Regards, > > Sakari Ailus > sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
