On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Milo Kim <milo.kim@xxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Bryan, > > > On 10/16/2013 03:37 AM, Bryan Wu wrote: >> >> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 12:38 AM, Laurent Pinchart >> <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Bryan, >>> >>> On Thursday 10 October 2013 17:02:18 Bryan Wu wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Tuesday 08 October 2013 00:06:23 Sakari Ailus wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 11:20:53AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 10:27:06PM +0200, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 09/23/2013 06:37 PM, Oliver Schinagl wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 09/23/13 16:45, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I would like to have a short discussion on LED flash devices >>>>>>>>>> support >>>>>>>>>> in the kernel. Currently there are two APIs: the V4L2 and LED >>>>>>>>>> class >>>>>>>>>> API exposed by the kernel, which I believe is not good from user >>>>>>>>>> space POV. Generic applications will need to implement both APIs. >>>>>>>>>> I >>>>>>>>>> think we should decide whether to extend the led class API to add >>>>>>>>>> support for more advanced LED controllers there or continue to use >>>>>>>>>> the both APIs with overlapping functionality. There has been some >>>>>>>>>> discussion about this on the ML, but without any consensus reached >>>>>>>>>> [1]. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> What about the linux-pwm framework and its support for the >>>>>>>>> backlight >>>>>>>>> via dts? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Or am I talking way to uninformed here. Copying backlight to >>>>>>>>> flashlight with some minor modification sounds sensible in a way... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'd assume we don't need yet another user interface for the LEDs ;) >>>>>>>> AFAICS the PWM subsystem exposes pretty much raw interface in sysfs. >>>>>>>> The PWM LED controllers are already handled in the leds-class API, >>>>>>>> there is the leds_pwm driver (drivers/leds/leds-pwm.c). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm adding linux-pwm and linux-leds maintainers at Cc so someone may >>>>>>>> correct me if I got anything wrong. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The PWM subsystem is most definitely not a good fit for this. The >>>>>>> only >>>>>>> thing it provides is a way for other drivers to access a PWM device >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> use it for some specific purpose (pwm-backlight, leds-pwm). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The sysfs support is a convenience for people that needs to use a PWM >>>>>>> in a way for which no driver framework exists, or for which it >>>>>>> doesn't >>>>>>> make sense to write a driver. Or for testing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Presumably, what we need is a few enhancements to support in a >>>>>>>> standard way devices like MAX77693, LM3560 or MAX8997. There is >>>>>>>> already a led class driver for the MAX8997 LED controller >>>>>>>> (drivers/leds/leds-max8997.c), but it uses some device-specific >>>>>>>> sysfs >>>>>>>> attributes. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thus similar devices are currently being handled by different >>>>>>>> subsystems. The split between the V4L2 Flash and the leds class API >>>>>>>> WRT to Flash LED controller drivers is included in RFC [1], it seems >>>>>>>> still up to date. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> [1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-leds/msg00899.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Perhaps it would make sense for V4L2 to be able to use a LED as >>>>>>> exposed >>>>>>> by the LED subsystem and wrap it so that it can be integrated with >>>>>>> V4L2? If functionality is missing from the LED subsystem I suppose >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> could be added. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The V4L2 flash API supports also xenon flashes, not only LED ones. >>>>>> That >>>>>> said, I agree there's a common subset of functionality most LED flash >>>>>> controllers implement. >>>>>> >>>>>>> If I understand correctly, the V4L2 subsystem uses LEDs as flashes >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> camera devices. I can easily imagine that there are devices out there >>>>>>> which provide functionality beyond what a regular LED will provide. >>>>>>> So >>>>>>> perhaps for things such as mobile phones, which typically use a plain >>>>>>> LED to illuminate the surroundings, an LED wrapped into something >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> emulates the flash functionality could work. But I doubt that the LED >>>>>>> subsystem is a good fit for anything beyond that. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I originally thought one way to do this could be to make it as easy as >>>>>> possible to support both APIs in driver which some aregued, to which I >>>>>> agree, is rather poor desing. >>>>>> >>>>>> Does the LED API have a user space interface library like libv4l2? If >>>>>> yes, one option oculd be to implement the wrapper between the V4L2 and >>>>>> LED APIs there so that the applications using the LED API could also >>>>>> access those devices that implement the V4L2 flash API. Torch mode >>>>>> functionality is common between the two right now AFAIU, >>>>>> >>>>>> The V4L2 flash API also provides a way to strobe the flash using an >>>>>> external trigger which typically connected to the sensor (and the user >>>>>> can choose between that and software strobe). I guess that and Xenon >>>>>> flashes aren't currently covered by the LED API. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The issue is that we have a LED API targetted at controlling LEDs, a >>>>> V4L2 >>>>> flash API targetted at controlling flashes, and hardware devices >>>>> somewhere >>>>> in the middle that can be used to provide LED or flash function. >>>>> Merging >>>>> the two APIs on the kernel side, with a compatibility layer for both >>>>> kernel space and user space APIs, might be an idea worth investigating. >>>> >>>> >>>> I'm so sorry for jumping in the discussion so late. Some how the >>>> emails from linux-media was archived in my Gmail and I haven't >>>> checkout this for several weeks. >>>> >>>> I agree right now LED API doesn't quite fit for the usage of V4L2 >>>> Flash API. But I'd also like to see a unified API. >>>> >>>> Currently, LED API are exported to user space as sysfs interface, >>>> while V4L2 Flash APIs are like IOCTL and user space library. We also >>>> merged some LED Flash trigger into LED subsystem. My basic idea is >>>> what about creating or expanding the LED Flash trigger driver and >>>> provide a well defined sysfs interface, which can be wrapped into user >>>> space libv4l2. >>> >>> >>> The biggest reason why we're not fond of sysfs-based APIs for media >>> devices is >>> that they can't provide atomicity. There's no way to set multiple >>> parameters >>> in a single operation. >>> >>> We can't get rid of the sysfs LEDs API, but maybe we could have a unified >>> kernel LED/flash subsystem that would provide both a sysfs-based API to >>> ensure >>> compatibility with current userspace software and an ioctl-based API >>> (possibly >>> through V4L2 controls). That way LED/flash devices would be registered >>> with a >>> single subsystem, and the corresponding drivers won't have to care about >>> the >>> API exposed to userspace. That would require a major refactoring of the >>> in- >>> kernel APIs though. >>> >> >> I agree this. I'm thinking about expanding the ledtrig-camera.c >> created by Milo Kim. This trigger will provide flashing and strobing >> control of a LED device and for sure the LED device driver like >> drivers/leds/leds-lm355x.c. >> >> So we basically can do this: >> 1. add V4L2 Flash subdev into ledtrig-camera.c. So this trigger driver >> can provide trigger API to kernel drivers as well as V4L2 Flash API to >> userspace. >> 2. add the real flash torch functions into LED device driver like >> leds-lm355x.c, this driver will still provide sysfs interface and >> extended flash/torch control sysfs interface as well. >> >> I'm not sure about whether we need some change in V4L2 internally. But >> actually Andrzej Hajda's patchset is quite straightforward, but we >> just need put those V4L2 Flash API into a LED trigger driver and the >> real flash/torch operation in a LED device driver. >> >> Milo, could you please give some comments here? > > > General LED trigger APIs were created not for the application interface but > for any kernel space driver. > The LED camera trigger APIs are used by a camera driver, not application. > That's basically correct, but trigger sometime can also provide sysfs interface which might be used by user space app. Actually this camera flash/torch trigger API can also be used by V4L2 Flash subdev. We create a V4L2 Flash subdev in the driver, which will expose V4L2 API to user space. And this V4L2 Flash subdev will use this flash/torch trigger API to talk with our LED core and it really doesn't need to know the details about the LED flash/torch chip, if we can provide a good interface between trigger and LED device driver. So benefits are a) one trigger/V4L2 Flash subdev driver can be used by multiple LED chips b) LED chip driver just need to provide standard or extended LED API to support flash/torch c) LED chip driver still keep those LED sysfs interface to user space and won't break user space application > Some LED devices provide basic LED functionalities and high current features > like a flash and a torch.(eg. LM3554, LM3642) > The reason why I added the LED camera trigger is > "for providing multiple operations(LEDs, flash and torch) by one LED > device driver". > > For example, > A LED indicator is controlled via the LED sysfs. > And flash and torch are controlled by a camera driver - calls exported LED > trigger function, ledtrig_flash_ctrl(). > > My understanding is the V4L2 subsystem provides rich IOCTLs for the media > device. > I agree that the V4L2 is more proper interface for camera *application*. > > So, my suggestion is: > - If a device has only flash/torch functionalities, then register the > driver as the V4L2 sub-device. > - If a device provides not only flash/torch but also LED features, then > create the driver as the MFD. > We really don't need to separate them, one LED device driver can provide flash/torch/normal functions in on driver. I think LED device driver is trying to provide the LED chip's hardware functions, like flash/torch/indicator etc. how to use it, we can choose different trigger. That gives us the maxim flexibility. > For example, LM3555 (and AS3645A) is used only for the camera. > Then, this driver is registered as the V4L2 sub-device. > (drivers/media/i2c/as3645a.c) - no change at all. > That's current solution, we plan to unify this two API since those chip are basically LED. > On the other hands, LM3642 has an indicator mode with flash/torch. > Then, it will consist of 3 parts - MFD core, LED(indicator) and > V4L2(flash/torch). > So if one LED device driver can support that, we don't need these 3 parts. Thanks, -Bryan > Then, ledtrig-camera will be removed after we complete to change the driver > structure. > > Best regards, > Milo > > -- 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
