Hi!
On 08.07.2010 05:31, Mike Isely wrote:
These are cx25840 patches and I'm not the maintainer of that module. I
can't really speak to the correctness of the changes. Best I can do is
to try the patch with a few pvrusb2-driven devices here that use the
cx25840 module. I've done that now (HVR-1950 and PVR-USB2 model 24012)
and everything continues to work fine.
I also retested the patch (with the recent v4l changes) and my device
continues to work as expected (using your current snapshot from July,
Mike :) ).
Note, this part of the patch:
int hw_fix = state->pvr150_workaround;
-
- if (std == V4L2_STD_NTSC_M_JP) {
+ if (std == V4L2_STD_NTSC_M_JP) {
/* Japan uses EIAJ audio standard */
cx25840_write(client, 0x808, hw_fix ? 0x2f : 0xf7);
} else if (std == V4L2_STD_NTSC_M_KR) {
is a whitespace-only change which introduces a bogus tab and messes up
the indentation of that opening if-statement. It should probably be
removed from the patch.
I wonder how that came in there... my excuses for this (and also the
removed new line some lines below that).
Other than that, you have my ack:
Acked-By: Mike Isely<isely@xxxxxxxxx>
-Mike
Hmm... I've read a bit in the wiki about submitting patches and read
that one should sign-off his/her patches... as I didn't do that back
then (as I thought that patch would be open for discussion ^^ - note to
self: add RFC next time), should I resend the patch with a comment and
the sign-off (and excluding the indentation mistake) or should I just
send a sign-off in reference to this patch? Or something else?
Regards,
Sven
--
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
