On Wed, 28 May 2014, Philipp Zabel wrote: > Hi Guennadi, > > Am Dienstag, den 27.05.2014, 21:48 +0200 schrieb Guennadi Liakhovetski: > > Hi Philipp, > > > > On Mon, 26 May 2014, Philipp Zabel wrote: > > > > > >From the looks of it, mt9v022 and mt9v032 are very similar, > > > as are mt9v024 and mt9v034. With minimal changes it is possible > > > to support mt9v02[24] with the same driver. > > > > Are you aware of drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/mt9v022.c? > > Yes. Unfortunately this driver can't be used in a system without > soc_camera. It uses soc_camera helpers and doesn't implement pad ops > among others. As I mentioned many times, this compatibility is a matter of someone just needing and finally doing this. If you need this, please, extend the mt9v022 driver to also work with non soc-camera hosts, if you need any help - please feel free to ask, I can send you my conversion code, that I've done for ov772x, but never managed to finalise testing, unfortunately. > > With this patch you'd duplicate support for both mt9v022 and mt9v024, > > which doesn't look like a good idea to me. > > While this is true, given that the mt9v02x/3x sensors are so similar, > the support is already duplicated in all but name. > Would you suggest we should try to merge the mt9v032 and mt9v022 > drivers? Out of 3 options: 1. extend mt9v022 to work with non soc-camera hosts 2. extend mt9v032 to also support mt9v022 and mt9v024 3. merge both mt9v022 and mt9v032 drivers option 2 seems the worst to me. I'm ok with either 1 or 3, whereas 3 is more difficult than 1. Thanks Guennadi -- 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
