Hi Sakari, On Thursday 23 February 2012 08:01:23 Sakari Ailus wrote: > Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > [snip] > > > >> +/* active cropping area */ > >> +#define V4L2_SUBDEV_SEL_TGT_CROP_ACTIVE 0x0000 > >> +/* cropping bounds */ > >> +#define V4L2_SUBDEV_SEL_TGT_CROP_BOUNDS 0x0002 > >> +/* current composing area */ > >> +#define V4L2_SUBDEV_SEL_TGT_COMPOSE_ACTIVE 0x0100 > >> +/* composing bounds */ > > > > I'm not sure if ACTIVE is a good name here. It sounds confusing as we > > already have V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_ACTIVE. > > We are using V4L2_SEL_TGT_COMPOSE_ACTIVE on V4L2 nodes already --- the > name I'm using here just mirrors the naming on V4L2 device nodes. If I > choose a different name here, some of that analogy is lost. > > That said, I'm not against changing this but the equivalent change > should then be made on V4L2 selection API for consistency. I'm not against changing the V4L2 selection API either :-) Just think about developers talking about "try crop active" or "active crop bounds". Even worse, will "active crop" refer to the active target or the active "which" ? That will be very confusing. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart -- 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
