> On Sun, Jun 05, 2011 at 04:28:03PM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 10:41:21AM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: >> > > There are currently two use cases: Sakari's flash controller needs >> to >> > > report errors which are a bitmask of possible error conditions. It >> is way >> > > overkill to split that up in separate boolean controls, especially >> since >> > > apps will also want to get an event whenever such an error is >> raised. >> > >> > Hmm... returning errors via V4L2 controls don't seem to be a good >> implementation. >> > I need to review his RFC to better understand his idea. >> >> The "errors" are not errors in the traditional meaning --- they also are >> called faults. They signal that there's either a temporary or a >> permanent >> hardware problem with the flash controller. The user will be able to >> mitigate with many of these. Also the faults do arrive asynchronously, >> making traditional error handling unsuitable for them. For example, the >> LED >> controller may overheat in some situations which cause immediate LED >> shutdown, leading to only partially flash exposed frame. When this >> happens >> the user has to be notified of the condition, and to avoid reading a >> large >> set of controls, a single bitmask control telling directly the reason >> for >> the trouble is ideal. >> >> The full RFC may be found here: >> >> <USR:http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-media/msg32030.html> > > That was supposed to be > > <URL:http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-media/msg32030.html> > > The adp1653 flash controller driver using the flash API. The patches have > been acked by Laurent already. Sakari, I think it is best if you combine that driver with my bitmask patch series and have it pulled as a whole. Regards, Hans -- 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
