Hi Sakari, On 02/04/2012 09:30 PM, Sakari Ailus wrote: >>> +#define V4L2_SUBDEV_SEL_FLAG_SIZE_GE (1<< 0) >>> +#define V4L2_SUBDEV_SEL_FLAG_SIZE_LE (1<< 1) >>> +#define V4L2_SUBDEV_SEL_FLAG_KEEP_CONFIG (1<< 2) >>> + >>> +/* active cropping area */ >>> +#define V4L2_SUBDEV_SEL_TGT_CROP_ACTIVE 0 >>> +/* cropping bounds */ >>> +#define V4L2_SUBDEV_SEL_TGT_CROP_BOUNDS 2 >> >> You've dropped the DEFAULT targets but the target numbers stayed >> unchanged. How about using hex numbers ? e.g. >> >> #define V4L2_SUBDEV_SEL_TGT_COMPOSE_ACTIVE 0x0100 >> #define V4L2_SUBDEV_SEL_TGT_COMPOSE_BOUNDS 0x0101 > > Fine for me. Changed for the next revision. > > I wanted to keep the target numbers the same since we're still using > exactly the same as the V4L2. You're right, keeping the numbers same for subdevs and regular video nodes may be important. I'm wondering whether we should use same definitions for subdevs, rather than inventing new ones ? In case we associate the selection targets with controls some target identifiers must not actually be different. Whether the control belongs directly to a video node control handler or is inherited from a sub-device the selection target would have to be same. I'm referring here to an auto focus rectangle selection target base for instance. I guess including videodev2.h from v4l2-subdev.h is not an option, if at all necessary ? -- Thanks, 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
