Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 02/19/2016 05:24 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: >> Em Fri, 19 Feb 2016 14:24:08 +0100 >> Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xxxxxxxxx> escreveu: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> The soc-camera framework is a problem for reusability of sub-device drivers since >>> those need access to the soc-camera framework. Which defeats the purpose of the >>> sub-device framework. It is the reason why we still have a media/i2c/soc-camera >>> directory for subdevs that can only work with soc-camera. >>> >>> Ideally I would like to drop soc-camera completely, but it is still in use. >>> >>> One of the largest users is Renesas with their r-car SoC, but Niklas Söderlund >>> made a replacement driver that should make it possible to remove the soc-camera >>> r-car driver, hopefully this year. >>> >>> What I would like to do is to move soc-camera drivers that we consider obsolete >>> to staging, and remove them in 1-2 kernel cycles if nobody steps up. >>> >>> See also this past thread from Guennadi: >>> >>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-media/msg89253.html >>> >>> And yes, I said in that thread that I was OK with keeping soc-camera as-is. But >>> it still happens that companies pick this framework for new devices (the driver >>> for the Tegra K1 for example). It is another reason besides the reusability issue >>> for remove this framework more aggressively then I intended originally. >>> >>> >>> We have the following drivers: >>> >>> - pxa_camera for the PXA27x Quick Capture Interface >>> >>> Apparently this architecture still gets attention (see the link to the thread >>> above). But it does use vb1 which we really want to phase out soon. Does anyone >>> know if this driver still works with the latest kernel? Because it is using vb1 >>> it is a strong candidate for removing it (or replacing it with something better >>> if someone steps up). Most certainly. pxa27x_camera is actively maintained, the latest submission request for merge is 11 days ago : https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/2/8/789 I can submit a patch in MAINTAINERS if you wish to take it in my bucket. I am maintaining the pxa architecture, and I do have the hardware to test the submissions. As you will see in the above message the driver works fine with v4.5-rc2. If you want modifications, let me know, explain to me what you want, and I'll see how to carry them out (because vb1 out of context is obfuscated to me). A good explanation would a an example of another driver pxa_camera should look like, so that I can see the difference in the APIs from soc_camera and evaluate the work to be done. >>> Now I am not planning to remove soc-camera (yet), but at least we should get >>> rid of unmaintained drivers, especially if they don't work anymore or if they >>> use the old vb1 mess. >>> >>> And we can then take a good look at what remains. >> >> You're forgetting the I2C sensor cam drivers. There are 14 such drivers >> under drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/. > > I didn't forget those, but I thought that we should tackle those later. > It's not so easy to remove the soc-camera dependency from them. I tried > that once, and I think I could only make one or two of those drivers soc-camera > independent :-( > > And without hardware you have no idea if they still work. Same thing as above, I can commit at least for mt9m111.c, for which I have both the hardware and the knowledge. I cannot speak for the other drivers. So all in all, if you point me in the right direction, I'll take care of the changes in pxa_camera.c and mt9m111.c. Cheers. -- Robert -- 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
