Re: [PATCH v8 3/5] staging: bcm2835-camera: Register bcm2835-camera with vchiq_bus_type

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Greg,

On 7/3/23 3:29 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 10:16:26PM +0200, Umang Jain wrote:
Register the bcm2835-camera with the vchiq_bus_type instead of using
platform driver/device.

Also the VCHIQ firmware doesn't support device enumeration, hence
one has to maintain a list of devices to be registered in the interface.

Signed-off-by: Umang Jain <umang.jain@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  .../bcm2835-camera/bcm2835-camera.c           | 16 +++++++-------
  .../interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_arm.c           | 21 ++++++++++++++++---
  2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/vc04_services/bcm2835-camera/bcm2835-camera.c b/drivers/staging/vc04_services/bcm2835-camera/bcm2835-camera.c
index 346d00df815a..f37b2a881d92 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/vc04_services/bcm2835-camera/bcm2835-camera.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/vc04_services/bcm2835-camera/bcm2835-camera.c
@@ -24,8 +24,9 @@
  #include <media/v4l2-event.h>
  #include <media/v4l2-common.h>
  #include <linux/delay.h>
-#include <linux/platform_device.h>
+#include "../interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_arm.h"
+#include "../interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_device.h"
  #include "../vchiq-mmal/mmal-common.h"
  #include "../vchiq-mmal/mmal-encodings.h"
  #include "../vchiq-mmal/mmal-vchiq.h"
@@ -1841,7 +1842,7 @@ static struct v4l2_format default_v4l2_format = {
  	.fmt.pix.sizeimage = 1024 * 768,
  };
-static int bcm2835_mmal_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
+static int bcm2835_mmal_probe(struct vchiq_device *device)
  {
  	int ret;
  	struct bcm2835_mmal_dev *dev;
@@ -1896,7 +1897,7 @@ static int bcm2835_mmal_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
  						       &camera_instance);
  		ret = v4l2_device_register(NULL, &dev->v4l2_dev);
  		if (ret) {
-			dev_err(&pdev->dev, "%s: could not register V4L2 device: %d\n",
+			dev_err(&device->dev, "%s: could not register V4L2 device: %d\n",
  				__func__, ret);
  			goto free_dev;
  		}
@@ -1976,7 +1977,7 @@ static int bcm2835_mmal_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
  	return ret;
  }
-static void bcm2835_mmal_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
+static void bcm2835_mmal_remove(struct vchiq_device *device)
  {
  	int camera;
  	struct vchiq_mmal_instance *instance = gdev[0]->instance;
@@ -1988,17 +1989,16 @@ static void bcm2835_mmal_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
  	vchiq_mmal_finalise(instance);
  }
-static struct platform_driver bcm2835_camera_driver = {
+static struct vchiq_driver bcm2835_camera_driver = {
  	.probe		= bcm2835_mmal_probe,
-	.remove_new	= bcm2835_mmal_remove,
+	.remove		= bcm2835_mmal_remove,
No need to change this here, right?  That's independant of this patch
series.

Why not ?

Should I have "remove_new()"  in the struct vchiq_driver {..} [Patch 1/5] instead of "remove()"  -  match up with platform_driver virtual interface ?


thanks,

greg k-h




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Input]     [Video for Linux]     [Gstreamer Embedded]     [Mplayer Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Yosemite Backpacking]

  Powered by Linux