On Wed, Sep 27, 2023, at 12:40, Sakari Ailus wrote:
>
> V4L2_FWNODE already implies V4L2_ASYNC so V4L2_ASYNC can be removed. I
> somehow thought this only needed V4L2_ASYNC but that indeed is not the
> case.
>
> I'll just drop the line selecting V4L2_ASYNC above if that's fine.
>
Sure, sounds good to me.
Arnd
