>Andy Walls [mailto:awalls@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] wrote: >I didn't do a full review (I have no time lately), but I noticed this: > > >> +static void v4l2_m2m_try_schedule(struct v4l2_m2m_ctx *m2m_ctx) >> +{ >> + struct v4l2_m2m_dev *m2m_dev; >[...] >> + v4l2_m2m_try_run(m2m_dev); >> +} > >[...] > >> +void v4l2_m2m_job_finish(struct v4l2_m2m_dev *m2m_dev, >> + struct v4l2_m2m_ctx *m2m_ctx) >> +{ >[...] >> + v4l2_m2m_try_schedule(m2m_ctx); >> + v4l2_m2m_try_run(m2m_dev); >> +} > >I assume it is not bad, but was it your intention to have an addtitonal >call to v4l2_m2m_try_run() ? Thanks for noticing that, but yes, this is intentional. Simplifies the code a bit and will work properly. Best regards -- Pawel Osciak Linux Platform Group Samsung Poland R&D Center -- 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
