On 12/5/18 10:50 AM, Hans Verkuil wrote:
On 12/05/2018 02:20 AM, Steve Longerbeam wrote:
Hi Hans, Philipp,
One comment on my side...
On 12/3/18 7:21 AM, Hans Verkuil wrote:
<snip>
+void imx_media_mem2mem_device_unregister(struct imx_media_video_dev *vdev)
+{
+ struct mem2mem_priv *priv = to_mem2mem_priv(vdev);
+ struct video_device *vfd = priv->vdev.vfd;
+
+ mutex_lock(&priv->mutex);
+
+ if (video_is_registered(vfd)) {
+ video_unregister_device(vfd);
+ media_entity_cleanup(&vfd->entity);
Is this needed?
If this is to be part of the media controller, then I expect to see a call
to v4l2_m2m_register_media_controller() somewhere.
Yes, I agree there should be a call to
v4l2_m2m_register_media_controller(). This driver does not connect with
any of the imx-media entities, but calling it will at least make the
mem2mem output/capture device entities (and processing entity) visible
in the media graph.
Philipp, can you pick/squash the following from my media-tree github fork?
6fa05f5170 ("media: imx: mem2mem: Add missing media-device header")
d355bf8b15 ("media: imx: Add missing unregister and remove of mem2mem
device")
6787a50cdc ("media: imx: mem2mem: Register with media control")
Steve
Why is this driver part of the imx driver? Since it doesn't connect with
any of the imx-media entities, doesn't that mean that this is really a
stand-alone driver?
It is basically a stand-alone m2m driver, but it makes use of some
imx-media utility functions like imx_media_enum_format(). Also making it
a true stand-alone driver would require creating a second /dev/mediaN
device.
Steve
