On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 1:53 AM Tomi Valkeinen
<tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 29/07/2022 11:45, Satish Nagireddy wrote:
>
> >> @@ -1011,7 +1342,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(media_entity_get_fwnode_pad);
> >>
> >> struct media_pipeline *media_entity_pipeline(struct media_entity *entity)
> >> {
> >> - return entity->pipe;
> >> + return entity->pads->pipe;
> >
> > I am not sure If it is always safe to return the pipe associated with
> > the first pad. I think this will work with all the existing drivers.
> > Let's say If pads of an entity are associated with different pipes,
> > this function might require extending the support of returning
> > pipe based on pad index. Please let me know your opinion.
>
> That's true. The kdoc for this function says:
>
> * In general, entities can be part of multiple pipelines, when carrying
> * multiple streams (either on different pads, or on the same pad using
> * multiplexed streams). This function is ill-defined in that case. It
> * currently returns the pipeline associated with the first pad of the
> entity.
>
> I did consider adding a warning if the function is called for entities
> with more than one pad. But that probably would give false warnings,
> e.g. for a simple entity with one sink and one source pad. In that case
> both pads are always part of the same pipeline, and
> media_entity_pipeline() works correctly.
>
> We could perhaps add a check here which verifies that all the pads in
> the entity have the same pipe.
>
> >> }
> >> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(media_entity_pipeline);
> >
> > nit, It would be nice to rename this function to media_entity_get_pipe
> > or media_entity_get_pipeline for better readability.
>
> I'm ok with that, but we do have other functions with this style:
> media_entity_remote_pad(), media_entity_id(), ...
>
> Tomi
I could only see one function with the similar style ==>
media_entity_get_fwnode_pad
-Satish
