On Tue, 30 Aug 2011, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Guennadi, > > On Tuesday 30 August 2011 15:13:25 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > On Tue, 30 Aug 2011, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > On Tuesday 30 August 2011 10:55:08 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > > > On Mon, 29 Aug 2011, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > > > On Monday 29 August 2011 14:34:53 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 29 Aug 2011, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > > > > > On Monday 29 August 2011 14:18:50 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sun, 28 Aug 2011, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [snip] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -774,17 +839,27 @@ static int ov5642_s_fmt(struct > > > > > > > > > > v4l2_subdev *sd, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ov5642_try_fmt(sd, mf); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + priv->out_size.width = mf->width; > > > > > > > > > > + priv->out_size.height = mf->height; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It looks like to me (but I may be wrong) that you achieve > > > > > > > > > different resolutions using cropping, not scaling. If that's > > > > > > > > > correct you should implement s_crop support and refuse > > > > > > > > > changing the resolution through s_fmt. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As the patch explains (I think) on several occasions, currently > > > > > > > > only the 1:1 scale is supported, and it was our deliberate > > > > > > > > choice to implement this using the scaling API > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you implement cropping, you should use the crop API, not the > > > > > > > scaling API > > > > > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > It's changing both - input and output sizes. > > > > > > > > > > Sure, but it's still cropping. > > > > > > > > Why? Isn't it a matter of the PoV? > > > > > > No it isn't. Cropping is cropping, regardless of how you look at it. > > > > > > > It changes the output window, i.e., implements S_FMT. And S_FMT is by > > > > far more important / widely used than S_CROP. Refusing to change the > > > > output window and always just returning the == crop size wouldn't be > > > > polite, IMHO. > > > > > > If your sensor has no scaler the output size is equal to the crop > > > rectangle. There's no way around that, and there's no reason to have the > > > driver behave otherwise. > > > > > > > Don't think many users would guess to use S_CROP. > > > > > > Users who want to crop use S_CROP. > > > > > > > Standard applications a la mplayer don't use S_CROP at all. > > > > > > That's because they don't want to crop. mplayer expects the driver to > > > perform scaling when it calls S_FMT, and users won't be happy if you > > > crop instead. > > > > So, here's my opinion, based on the V4L2 spec. I'm going to base on this > > and pull this patch into my tree and let Mauro decide, unless he expresses > > his negative opinion before that. > > I've also made other comments. I expect at least a v2 that addresses them. Of course, (most of) your other comments are valid and they will be addressed. Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/ -- 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
