On Sun, 24 Jan 2010, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 19:44:06 -0600 (CST)
Theodore Kilgore <kilgota@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
If everyone else is agreeable, I would propose that the recent
changes to sq905c.c should simply be pulled, and that is the best
solution to the problem.
A pull request for this change has been sent last sunday.
Jean-Francois,
Thanks.
I would also like to address three other items.
1. For a long time I was not getting the mail from this list. I could
not figure out what was the matter, but I finally remember what happened:
I went on a two week vacation last summer, and I unsubscribed before I
left home, since I did not want to deal with what seemed like several
hundred messages a day piling up unread in my inbox. Then when I got back
I was too busy trying to catch up with work to remember to resubscribe.
Fixed, now.
2. I hope that when you got the sq905c changes that you also pulled the
changes for mr97310a.c. Several things have been done there recently.
First, there was a patch to the initialization for one of the types of
supported cameras. Without that patch the camera will work only on a host
machine with OHCI USB support and will fail to stream when hooked to a
host machine with a UHCI controller. There was a desperate, last minute
attempt to get this patch into 2.6.32, the urgency of which apparently
failed to convince the higher-ups and it did not get in. The only excuse
for the bad timing is the obvious one, that who could imagine that such a
problem could occur until actually confronted with it? It is just too
weird. I do not know the current status of this patch.
Second, other cleanups have been done to mr97310a.c
Third, another camera with yet another init sequence and control
capabilities has been discovered, and it is added to mr97310a.c
I would say that the most recent version of the mr97310a driver is the
best and most bug-free of the versions, and I hope it gets used.
3. The sn9c2028 driver. It runs the three sn9c2028 cameras that I have on
hand and does so pretty well.
I would characterize the driver as unfinished, though. For, there are at
least two cameras supported there which I do not and never did personally
own, and therefore I cannot test them. I do have init sequences which are
based upon snoops previously done, and I put those in the driver.
Unfortunately, I have been unable to get anyone else to test those two
cameras, either. Apparently, the only way to get them tested is to send
the driver mainstream. After that, perhaps I will get reports whether they
work, or not!
The two cameras in question which are untested or are incompletely tested
are (quoting from sn9c2028.c)
{USB_DEVICE(0x0458, 0x7005)}, /* Genius Smart 300, version 2 */
/* The Genius Smart is untested. I can't find an owner ! */
and
{USB_DEVICE(0x0c45, 0x8008)}, /* Mini-Shotz ms-350 */
where the owner tells me that the code I sent him works, but he can not do
more testing right now because he is too busy (wife is having first
child). The Mini-Shotz has obvious redundancies and bactrackings in the
init sequence which is used in the OEM driver. I would very much like to
be able to clean out all the crud which is in the OEM init sequence, but I
have no way to know exactly what is needed, without testing.
Thus, if anyone who reads this has either of the above sn9c2028 cameras or
any other one which is not currently supported at all, please contact me.
There is a lot of unfinished business with the sn9c2028 driver. I would
very much like for it to get done. But said work depends upon finding
owners and testers.
Theodore Kilgore
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
