On 09/22/2015 11:58 PM, Hans Verkuil wrote:
Hi Junghak,
A few small comments...
On 22-09-15 15:30, Junghak Sung wrote:
Move v4l2-specific stuff from videobu2-core to videobuf2-v4l2
without doing any functional changes.
I feel the introduction of v4l2_buf_ops falls under functional changes.
Is it possible to do that change in a separate patch before this one?
OK, I will move vb2_buf_ops changes to the patch before this one.
Signed-off-by: Junghak Sung <jh1009.sung@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Geunyoung Kim <nenggun.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Seung-Woo Kim <sw0312.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Inki Dae <inki.dae@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/media/v4l2-core/videobuf2-core.c | 1872 +-------------------------
drivers/media/v4l2-core/videobuf2-internal.h | 161 +++
drivers/media/v4l2-core/videobuf2-v4l2.c | 1678 +++++++++++++++++++++++
include/media/videobuf2-core.h | 118 +-
include/media/videobuf2-dvb.h | 8 +-
include/media/videobuf2-v4l2.h | 96 ++
6 files changed, 2009 insertions(+), 1924 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 drivers/media/v4l2-core/videobuf2-internal.h
<snip>
diff --git a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/videobuf2-v4l2.c b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/videobuf2-v4l2.c
index 2f2b738..8ca07bb 100644
--- a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/videobuf2-v4l2.c
+++ b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/videobuf2-v4l2.c
+
+const struct vb2_buf_ops v4l2_buf_ops = {
Shouldn't this be static?
+ .fill_user_buffer = __fill_v4l2_buffer,
+ .fill_vb2_buffer = __fill_vb2_buffer,
+ .set_timestamp = __set_timestamp,
+};
Yes, it should be static.
I'll fix it at next round.
Thank you for your review.
Regards,
Junghak
Regards,
Hans
--
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
