Hej Niklas,
On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 07:55:49PM +0200, Niklas Söderlund wrote:
...
> > > > > +static const struct v4l2_subdev_pad_ops risp_pad_ops = {
> > > > > + .set_fmt = risp_set_pad_format,
> > > > > + .get_fmt = risp_get_pad_format,
> > > >
> > > > Maybe set link_validate to v4l2_subdev_link_validate_default?
> > >
> > > I thought about that but with the multiplexed stream issue I thought it
> > > best to not to add that yet. Do you think this make sens?
> >
> > What would be the alternative? Without that, there's no guarantee
> > whatsoever what the input is. It may also enable writing user space that
> > breaks after fixing this in the driver.
>
> We still still don't have any guarantees whatsoever as we can only
> describe and validate one stream.
>
> >
> > Where in the pipeline would you have multiple streams over a single data
> > path?
>
> On Gen3 platforms without an ISP we have it on the rcar-csi2 sink pad
> and on Gen3 platforms with an ISP we have it on the rcar-isp sink pad.
> In both cases it's the IP block that separates the CSI-2 buss to the
> different capture engines.
Ok. In this case the driver may be better merged to the staging tree or
labelled experimental as its UAPI isn't stable. I wonder what Hans thinks.
--
Kind regards,
Sakari Ailus
