Hi Quentin
On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 02:19:21PM +0200, Quentin Schulz wrote:
> Hi Jacopo,
>
> On 5/31/22 12:50, Jacopo Mondi wrote:
> > Hi Quentin
> >
> > On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 04:58:33PM +0200, Quentin Schulz wrote:
> > > From: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > The sensor has 2592*1944 active pixels, surrounded by 16 active dummy
> > > pixels and there are an additional 24 black rows "at the bottom".
> > >
> > > [2624]
> > > +-----+------------------+-----+
> > > | | 16 dummy | |
> > > +-----+------------------+-----+
> > > | | | |
> > > | | [2592] | |
> > > | | | |
> > > |16 | valid | 16 |[2000]
> > > |dummy| |dummy|
> > > | | [1944]| |
> > > | | | |
> > > +-----+------------------+-----+
> > > | | 16 dummy | |
> > > +-----+------------------+-----+
> > > | | 24 black lines | |
> > > +-----+------------------+-----+
> > >
> > > The top-left coordinate is gotten from the registers specified in the
> > > modes which are identical for both currently supported modes.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > v4:
> > > - explicit a bit more the commit log,
> > > - added drawing in the commit log,
> > > - fixed reporting for V4L2_SEL_TGT_CROP_* thanks to Jacopo's help,
> > >
> > > added in v3
> > >
> > > drivers/media/i2c/ov5675.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/ov5675.c b/drivers/media/i2c/ov5675.c
> > > index c1f3c387afde0..384a9ea2372c3 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/media/i2c/ov5675.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/ov5675.c
> > > @@ -1121,6 +1121,38 @@ static int ov5675_get_format(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
> > > return 0;
> > > }
> > >
> > > +static int ov5675_get_selection(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
> > > + struct v4l2_subdev_state *state,
> > > + struct v4l2_subdev_selection *sel)
> > > +{
> > > + struct ov5675 *ov5675 = to_ov5675(sd);
> > > +
> > > + if (sel->which != V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_ACTIVE)
> > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > +
> > > + switch (sel->target) {
> > > + case V4L2_SEL_TGT_CROP_BOUNDS:
> > > + sel->r.top = 0;
> > > + sel->r.left = 0;
> > > + sel->r.width = 2624;
> > > + sel->r.height = 2000;
> > > + return 0;
> > > + case V4L2_SEL_TGT_CROP:
> > > + sel->r.top = 16;
> > > + sel->r.left = 16;
> > > + sel->r.width = ov5675->cur_mode->width;
> > > + sel->r.height = ov5675->cur_mode->height;
> > > + return 0;
> >
> > I'm afraid this doesn't match exactly my understanding of the
> > discussion we had.
> >
> > The driver defines the following modes
> >
> > /*
> > * OV5670 sensor supports following resolutions with full FOV:
> > * 4:3 ==> {2592x1944, 1296x972, 648x486}
> > * 16:9 ==> {2560x1440, 1280x720, 640x360}
> > */
> > static const struct ov5670_mode supported_modes[] = {
> > {
> > .width = 2592,
> > .height = 1944,
> > },
> > {
> > .width = 1296,
> > .height = 972,
> > },
> > {
> > .width = 648,
> > .height = 486,
> > },
> > {
> > .width = 2560,
> > .height = 1440,
> > },
> > {
> > .width = 1280,
> > .height = 720,
> > },
> > {
> > .width = 640,
> > .height = 360,
> > }
> > };
> >
> > The comment says all modes retain the "full FOV", which I assume it
> > implies they are obtained by sub-sampling and not cropping.
> >
> > The first three modes (4:3) are indeed obtained by subsampling the
> > full active pixel array:
> >
> > (2592,1944) / 2 = (1296,972) / 2 = (648,486)
> >
> > The last three are obtained by subsampling a slightly cropped portion
> > of the pixel array
> >
> > (2560,1440) / 2 = (1280,720) / 2 = (640,360)
> >
> > If you set CROP = cur_mode->[width/height] you will instead report the
> > visible width/height, which as said it's obtained by subsampling (of a
> > slightly cropped portion of the pixel array for the last three ones)
> >
> > The CROP rectangle is then (2592, 1944) for the first three and (2560,
> > 1440) for the last three.
> >
> > I would add a v4l2_rect to struct ov5670_mode where to record that and
> > report it here.
> >
>
> That makes a lot of sense to me, thanks for your patience and explanations.
>
> FYI, you're looking at the wrong driver (ov5670 vs ov5675; a mistake I make
You know what's depressing ? -I- have a series out for ov5670 :(
I'm so sorry, my brain got short-circuited by that probably...
> every now and then too :) ). However, the datasheet does say that "The
> OV5675 supports a binning mode to provide a lower resolution output while
> maintaining the field of view.[...] The OV5675 supports 2x2 binning." so I
> assume we're in the same scenario as you just explained.
>
> Since the OV5675 modes currently supported by the drivers are 4/3 only and
> the smaller size mode a result of subsampling, they both have the same CROP
> rectangle.
>
Thankfully the comment still applies to ov5675 then, and both modes
have the same (2592, 1944) crop rectangle :)
> > > + case V4L2_SEL_TGT_CROP_DEFAULT:
> > > + sel->r.top = 16;
> > > + sel->r.left = 16;
> > > + sel->r.width = supported_modes[0].width;
> > > + sel->r.height = supported_modes[0].height;
> > > + return 0;
> >
> > You could also define these values instead of fishing in the
> > supported_modes array, to protect against future changes to the array
> > itself. Up to you.
> >
>
> Since there's no cropping involved in the current modes, I assume we could
> just hardcode the width and height and tackle this limitation later, once we
> add more modes or support for configuring cropping (this patch only adds the
> getter and not the setter).
Fine with me!
Sorry again for the slip!
>
> Cheers,
> Quentin
