Hi Laurent, On Wed, 01 Oct 2014 00:00:50 +0300 Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Boris, > > On Tuesday 30 September 2014 11:44:23 Boris Brezillon wrote: > > On Tue, 30 Sep 2014 10:39:53 +0200 Thierry Reding wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 09:37:57AM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > >> On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 23:41:09 +0300 Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > > > > [...] > > > > > >>> Incidentally, patch 2/5 in this series is missing a documentation > > >>> update ;-) > > >> > > >> Yep, regarding this patch, I wonder if it's really necessary to add > > >> new formats to the v4l2_mbus_pixelcode enum. > > >> If we want to move to this new common definition (across the video > > >> related subsytems), we should deprecate the old enum > > >> v4l2_mbus_pixelcode, and this start by not adding new formats, don't > > >> you think ? > > > > > > I agree in general, but I think it could prove problematic in practice. > > > If somebody wants to use one of the new codes but is using the V4L2 enum > > > they have a problem. > > > > > > That said, given that there is now a unified enum people will hopefully > > > start converting drivers to it instead. > > > > I'm more worried about user-space lib/programs as this header is part > > of the uapi... > > > > But let's be optimistic here and keep porting new formats to > > v4l2_mbus_pixelcode enum ;-). > > I think we should try to keep the two in sync, until we can remove the > v4l2_mbus_pixelcode enum (I know, I'm being utopian here). > > However, I really want all pixel codes to be properly documented, regardless > of whether we add them to v4l2_mbus_pixelcode or not. > > > Anyway, I still don't know where to put the documentation. Dropping a > > new video format doc without any context (I mean subdev-formats.xml is > > included in media documentation, but there's no generic video doc yet) > > is a bit weird... > > Now that's a good question. We could start a generic video docbook > documentation. As I expect more infrastructure to be shared between V4L2 and > DRM (and, who knows, FBDEV...) over time, I think that would be a good move. > However docbook doesn't seem to be in the DRM developers' good books, so this > might be frown upon. We could also use a plain text, kerneldoc-like format for > the common documentation, but the formats would then disappear from the V4L2 > documentation, which isn't a very good idea. For that reason I would favour > docbook. > > I've CC'ed Hans Verkuil who might want to share his opinion on the matter. > I started to write a video-formats.xml file (actually I copied the subdev-formats.xml file and renamed v4l2-mbus into video-bus :-)), but these files cannot be used without the proper video_api.tmpl file, and I don't feel like I'm the one that should start writing this documentation (or at least I'd need some help). Anyway, even if you think I should write this doc, can we get this series mainlined first so that my HLCDC driver can make it into 3.19 ? Best Regards, Boris -- Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com -- 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
