On 2016-08-03 10:14:45 -0700, Steve Longerbeam wrote:
> On 08/03/2016 09:58 AM, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> > On 08/03/2016 06:55 PM, Steve Longerbeam wrote:
> >> On 08/03/2016 06:21 AM, Niklas Söderlund wrote:
> >>> On 2016-08-02 17:00:07 +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> >>>> [...]
> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c b/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c
> >>>>> index a8b434b..c6fed71 100644
> >>>>> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c
> >>>>> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/adv7180.c
> >>>>> @@ -680,10 +680,13 @@ static int adv7180_set_pad_format(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
> >>>>> switch (format->format.field) {
> >>>>> case V4L2_FIELD_NONE:
> >>>>> if (!(state->chip_info->flags & ADV7180_FLAG_I2P))
> >>>>> - format->format.field = V4L2_FIELD_INTERLACED;
> >>>>> + format->format.field = V4L2_FIELD_ALTERNATE;
> >>>>> break;
> >>>>> default:
> >>>>> - format->format.field = V4L2_FIELD_INTERLACED;
> >>>>> + if (state->chip_info->flags & ADV7180_FLAG_I2P)
> >>>>> + format->format.field = V4L2_FIELD_INTERLACED;
> >>>> I'm not convinced this is correct. As far as I understand it when the I2P
> >>>> feature is enabled the core outputs full progressive frames at the full
> >>>> framerate. If it is bypassed it outputs half-frames. So we have the option
> >>>> of either V4L2_FIELD_NONE or V4L2_FIELD_ALTERNATE, but never interlaced. I
> >>>> think this branch should setup the field format to be ALTERNATE regardless
> >>>> of whether the I2P feature is available.
> >>> I be happy to update the patch in such manner, but I feel this is more
> >>> for Steven to handle. I have no deep understanding of the adv7180 driver
> >>> and the only HW I have is the adv7180 and not adv7280, adv7280_m,
> >>> adv7282 or adv7282_m which is the models which have the ADV7180_FLAG_I2P
> >>> flag. So I can't really test such a change.
> >>>
> >>> Steven do you want to update this patch and resend it?
> >> Hi Niklas, I can update this patch, but it sounds like the whole thing
> >> is "up in the air" at this point, and we may want to yank out the I2P
> >> support altogether. I'll leave it up to Lars and others to work that out
> >> first.
> > Yeah, we should remove the whole I2P stuff, I was misinformed about how it
> > works. But either way I think this patch should simply not touch the current
> > behavior, so don't add new if (FLAG_I2P) checks.
>
> Hi Lars, Ok I can do that. I'll resubmit in next version of my patchset.
Thanks Steven, then I will drop this patch in my v3. Can you pleas CC me
when you send out your patch?
--
Regards,
Niklas Söderlund
