On 07/22/2014 05:09 AM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
Em Tue, 22 Jul 2014 04:05:05 +0300
Antti Palosaari <crope@xxxxxx> escreveu:
On 07/22/2014 03:51 AM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
Em Tue, 22 Jul 2014 03:08:19 +0300
Antti Palosaari <crope@xxxxxx> escreveu:
So what. Those were mostly WARNING only and all but long lines were some
new checks added to checkpatch recently. chekcpatch gets all the time
new and new checks, these were added after I have made that driver. I
will surely clean those later when I do some new changes to driver and
my checkpatch updates.
Antti,
I think you didn't read my comments in the middle of the checkpatch stuff.
Please read my email again. I'm not requiring you to fix the newer checkpatch
warning (Missing a blank line after declarations), and not even about the
80-cols warning. The thing is that there are two issues there:
1) you're adding API bits at msi2500 driver, instead of moving them
to videodev2.h (or reusing the fourcc types you already added there);
If you look inside driver code, you will see those defines are not used
- but commented out. It is simply dead definition compiler optimizes
away. It is code I used on my tests, but finally decided to comment out
to leave some time add those later to API. I later moved 2 of those to
API, that is done in same patch serie.
No issue here.
2) you're handling jiffies wrong inside the driver.
As you may know, adding a driver at staging is easier than at the main
tree, as we don't care much about checkpatch issues (and not even about
some more serious issues). However, when moving stuff out of staging,
we review the entire driver again, to be sure that it is ok.
That jiffie check is also rather new and didn't exists time drive was
done. Jiffie is used to calculate debug sample rate. There is multiple
times very similar code piece, which could be optimized to one. My plan
merge all those ~5 functions to one and use jiffies using macros as
checkpatch now likes. I don't see meaningful fix it now as you are going
to rewrite that stuff in near future in any case.
Ok, I'll apply the remaining patches.
Silencing all those checkpatch things is not very hard job though. If
you merge that stuff to media/master I can do it right away (I am
running older kernel and older checkpatch currently).
FYI, I always use the checkpatch available on our tree, no matter what
Kernel I'm running. My scripts just call ./scripts/checkpatch.pl.
I would like to also run/use *always* media/master, but it is not
usually possible. Let me list here all the issues which makes it
impossible in practice (issues which I see on current development process):
1) media/master is far behind Linus kernel master tree. It is usually
updated only 2 times per RC cycle, RC1 and around RC5. Even I want test
upstream RC, that makes it impossible.
2) RC1 is very often (more than 50%) unusable. It is simply too buggy.
For example 3.16 there was GPU related problems at least (and again).
3) I send one fix (PULL requested) for brand new Silicon Labs Si2168
driver on 2014-06-15. That was just before RC1 was released. It was
merged to media/fixes, but not media/master. "Unfortunately" that driver
gets very much interest and multiple other developers started hacking
with it, adding support for new hw and so. There was huge headache to
lead that development because code base was divided to 2 upstream git
trees; one in media/fixes and another in media/development. Critical and
problematic patch was still only in media/fixes, leaving media/master
driver broken. So that forces me to use media/fixes as a base and add
new patches top of it. Media/fixes is 3.15 whilst media/master is 3.16.
I mentioned that already you and I have got bug reports too, latest one
6 hours ago reporting his PCTV 292e stopped working...
So could it be possible to address those issues? Like media/master
contains all latest upstream patches and is updated/rebased weekly top
of Linus main tree?
regards
Antti
--
http://palosaari.fi/
--
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
