Hello Hans Thanks for the explanation. I have tried changing the controls to inactive and the are shown disabled on the gui, just as you say, but they are there :S. I personally liked better the previous behaviour, when the controls where not shown at all. But it is just that, a taste, if it is more correct showing them as inactive they will be inactive :). For a case where a option is only available at a specific format: I was also disablig the control (now inactiving it), and returning -EINVAL if the user tried to set the control on an incompatible format. Apparently the v4l2-compilance dont like that either, is this a false positive or I should behave differently?. Thank you again! On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Ricardo, > > On 07/30/2013 05:46 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote: >> Hello >> >> I have a camera that works on two modes: Mono and colour. On color >> mode it has 3 gains, on mono mode it has 1 gain. >> >> When the user sets the output to mono I disable the color controls >> (and the other way around). >> >> Also on color mode the hflip and vflip do not work, therefore I dont show them. >> >> I could return -EINVAL, but I rather not show the controls to the user. >> >> What would be the proper way to do this? > > Use the INACTIVE flag, that's the way it is typically done. You can still set > such controls, but the new value won't be active until you switch back to a > mode where they do work. > > Using INACTIVE will show such controls as disabled in a GUI like qv4l2. I highly > recommend using qv4l2 for testing this since it is the reference implementation > of how GUIs should interpret control flags. > > Regards, > > Hans > >> >> >> Thanks gain. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Tue 30 July 2013 17:18:58 Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote: >>>> Thanks for the explanation Hans! >>>> >>>> I finaly manage to pass that one ;) >>>> >>>> Just one more question. Why the compliance test checks if the DISABLED >>>> flag is on on for qctrls? >>>> >>>> http://git.linuxtv.org/v4l-utils.git/blob/3ae390e54a0ba627c9e74953081560192b996df4:/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-controls.cpp#l137 >>>> >>>> 137 if (fl & V4L2_CTRL_FLAG_DISABLED) >>>> 138 return fail("DISABLED flag set\n"); >>>> >>>> Apparently that has been added on: >>>> http://git.linuxtv.org/v4l-utils.git/commit/0a4d4accea7266d7b5f54dea7ddf46cce8421fbb >>>> >>>> But I have failed to find a reason >>> >>> It shouldn't be used anymore in drivers. With the control framework there is >>> no longer any reason to use the DISABLED flag. >>> >>> If something has a valid use case for it, then I'd like to know what it is. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Hans >> >> >> -- Ricardo Ribalda -- 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
