On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 10:19 PM Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Sergey > > On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 5:47 AM Sergey Senozhatsky > <sergey.senozhatsky.work@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On (21/03/17 08:58), Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote: > > [..] > > > > > > > > GET_CUR? > > > yep > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.13/media/uapi/v4l/vidioc-g-selection.html?highlight=vidioc_s_selection > > > > > On success the struct v4l2_rect r field contains the adjusted > > > > > rectangle. > > > > > > > > What is the adjusted rectangle here? Does this mean that firmware can > > > > successfully apply SET_CUR and return 0, but in reality it was not happy > > > > with the rectangle dimensions so it modified it behind the scenes? > > > > > > I can imagine that some hw might have spooky requirements for the roi > > > rectangle (multiple of 4, not crossing the bayer filter, odd/even > > > line...) so they might be able to go the closest valid config. > > > > Hmm. Honestly, I'm very unsure about it. ROI::SET_CUR can be a very > > hot path, depending on what user-space considers to be of interest > > and how frequently that object of interest changes its position/shape/etc. > > Doing GET_CUR after every SET_CUR doubles the number of firmware calls > > we issue, that's for sure; is it worth it - that's something that I'm > > not sure of. > > > > May I please ask for more opinions on this? > > Could you try setting the roi in a loop in your device and verify that > it accepts all the values with no modification. If so we can implement > the set/get as a quirk for other devices. as a loop I mean testing all the values not the same value again-and-again ;) > > > > > -ss > > > > -- > Ricardo Ribalda -- Ricardo Ribalda
