Hi Sakari,
On 12/31/2011 02:16 PM, Sakari Ailus wrote:
>>> I could think of an in-kernel counterpart for v4l2_mbus_framefmt, say,
>>> v4l2_mbus_framedesc. This could then be passed from subdev to another using
>>> a new subdev op.
>>
>> That might be needed eventually. But I'm not a great fan in general of yet
>> another set of callbacks for media bus frame format set up.
>>
>>> Something else that should probably belong there is information on the frame
>>> format: contrary to what I've previously thought, the sensor metadata is
>>> often sent as part of the same CSI-2 channel. There also can be other types
>>> of data, such as dummy data and data for black level calibration. I wouldn't
>>> want to export all this to the user space --- it shouldn't probably need to
>>> care about it.
>>>
>>> The transmitter of the data (sensor) has this information and the CSI-2
>>> receiver needs it. Same for the framesamples, as far as I understand.
>>
>> We could try to design some standard data structure for frame metadata -
>> that's how I understood the meaning of struct v4l2_mbus_framedesc.
>> But I doubt such attempts will be sucessful. And how can we distinguish
>> which data is valid and applicable when there is lots of weird stuff in one
>> data structure ? Using media bus pixel code only ?
>
> I think the media bus pixel code which is exported to the user space should
> not be involved with the metadata.
Then we need to find some method to distinguish streams with metadata on the
media bus, to be able to discard it before sending to user space.
I assume this is where struct v4l2_mbus_framedesc and related ops would help ?
Maybe we could create v4l2_mbus_framedesc with length (framesamples) member
in it and additionally 994 reserved bytes for future extensions ;-), e.g.
struct v4l2_mbus_framedesc {
unsigned int length;
unsigned int rserved[994];
};
struct v4l2_subdev_pad_ops {
....
int get_framedesc(int pad, struct v4l2_framedesc *fdesc);
int set_framedesc(int pad, struct v4l2_framedesc fdesc);
};
This would ensure same media bus format code regardless of frame meta data
presence.
In case metadata is sent in same CSI channel, the required buffer length
might be greater than what would width/height and pixel code suggest.
> The metadata is something that the user is likely interested only in the
> form it is in the system memory. It won't be processed in any way before
> it gets written to memory. The chosen mbus code may affect the format of the
> metadata, but that's something the sensor driver knows -- and I've yet to
> see a case where the user could choose the desired metadata format.
> Alternatively we could make the metadata path a separate path from the image
> data. I wonder how feasible that approach would be --- the subdevs would
> still be the same.
I was also considering metadata as sensor specific data structure retrieved
by the host after a frame has been captured and appending that data to a user
buffer. For such buffers a separate fourcc would be needed.
>>> Pixelrate is also used to figure out whether a pipeline can do streaming or
>>> not; the pixel rate originating from the sensor could be higher than the
>>> maximum of the ISP. For this reason, as well as for providing timing
>>> information, access to pixelrate is reequired in the user space.
>>>
>>> Configuring the framesamples could be done on the sensor using a control if
>>> necessary.
>>
>> Sure, that could work. But as I mentioned before, the host drivers would have
>> to be getting such control internally from subdevs. Not so nice IMHO. Although
>> I'm not in big opposition to that too.
>>
>> Grepping for v4l2_ctrl_g_ctrl() all the drivers appear to use it locally only.
>
> I don't think there's anything that really would prohibit doing this. There
> would need to be a way for the host to make a control read-only, to prevent
> changing framesamples while streaming.
I would rather make subdev driver to ensure all negotiated paramaters, which
changed during streaming could crash the system, stay unchanged after streaming
started. It's as simple as checking entity stream_count in s_ctrl() and
prohibiting change of control value if stream_count > 0.
> Pad-specific controls likely require more work than this.
Hym, I'd forgotten, the fact framesamples are per pad was an argument against
using v4l2 control for this parameter. We still need per pad controls for the
blanking controls, but for framesamples maybe it's better to just add subdev
callback, as acessing this parameter on subdevs directly from space isn't
really essential..
>>> Just my 5 euro cents. Perhaps we could discuss the topic on #v4l-meeting
>>> some time?
>>
>> I'm available any time this week. :)
>
> I think the solution could be related to frame metadata if we intend to
> specify the frame format. Btw. how does the framesamples relate to blanking?
Framesamples and blanking are on completely different levels. Framesamples
takes into account only active frame data, so H/V blanking doesn't matter here.
Framesamples is not intended for raw formats where blanking is applicable.
Framesamples only determines length of compressed stream, and blanking doesn't
really affect the data passed to and generated by a jpeg encoder.
> The metadata in a regular frame spans a few lines in the top and sometimes
> also on the bottom of that frame.
How do you handle it now, i.e. how the host finds out how much memory it needs
for a frame ? Or is the metadata just overwriting "valid" lines ?
> Late next week is fine for me.
Ok, I'll try to reserve some time then.
--
Regards,
Sylwester
--
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
