26.04.2020 02:27, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет:
>
> On 4/25/20 4:25 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>>
>>
>> 26.04.2020 02:13, Dmitry Osipenko пишет:
>>> 24.04.2020 06:55, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет:
>>>> +static int __maybe_unused vi_runtime_resume(struct device *dev)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct tegra_vi *vi = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>>>> + int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + ret = regulator_enable(vi->vdd);
>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>> + dev_err(dev, "failed to enable VDD supply: %d\n", ret);
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + ret = clk_set_rate(vi->clk, vi->soc->vi_max_clk_hz);
>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>> + dev_err(dev, "failed to set vi clock rate: %d\n", ret);
>>>> + goto disable_vdd;
>>>> + }
>>> Isn't setting clock rate using assigned-clocks in a device-tree enough?
>>> Could you please clarify why this vi_max_clk_hz is needed?
>>>
>> In that case it should be wrong to set the clock rate in the RPM
>> callback because RPM works asynchronously and RPM may not be suspended
>> on TGP -> sensor source switch.
>
> Driver will not do TPG and Sensor switch dynamically.
>
> Based on kconfig, it will only do TPG or Sensor and sensor will be
> default all the time once sensor support is added in next series.
>
Doesn't V4L have a native support for the capture source selection? Why
it needs to be a compile-time option?
I think other drivers use a generic V4L "Image Processing Controls" with
a configurable test_pattern option.
