Re: [PULL] soc-camera and mediabus

2010-01-10 Thread Mauro Carvalho Chehab
Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > Hi Mauro > > On Mon, 14 Dec 2009, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > >> Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: >>> So, is the doc patch, that I've sent to the list ok? Ok, the hunk for the >>> automatically (in hg) generated file will get dropped, and otherwise does >>> it look

Re: [PULL] soc-camera and mediabus

2009-12-24 Thread Guennadi Liakhovetski
Hi Mauro On Mon, 14 Dec 2009, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > > > So, is the doc patch, that I've sent to the list ok? Ok, the hunk for the > > automatically (in hg) generated file will get dropped, and otherwise does > > it look correct? > > It looks correctly

Re: [PULL] soc-camera and mediabus

2009-12-17 Thread Mauro Carvalho Chehab
Hans Verkuil wrote: > On Monday 14 December 2009 21:41:20 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: >> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009, Jonathan Cameron wrote: >> > Having bridge-specific code in a sub-device driver will be a disaster in the > long run. Well, we've seen what happens when you do it that way. True. > As

Re: [PULL] soc-camera and mediabus

2009-12-14 Thread Hans Verkuil
On Monday 14 December 2009 21:41:20 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > On Mon, 14 Dec 2009, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > >> 3) it would be interesting to patch the other sensor drivers to be > > >> compatible > > >>with soc_camera (mt9v011/ov7670); > > > > > > Well, this could

Re: [PULL] soc-camera and mediabus

2009-12-14 Thread Guennadi Liakhovetski
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > Hi All, > > >> 3) it would be interesting to patch the other sensor drivers to be > >> compatible > >>with soc_camera (mt9v011/ov7670); > > > > Well, this could be done, yes, but does it make sense to do this blindly > > without any hardware t

Re: [PULL] soc-camera and mediabus

2009-12-14 Thread Mauro Carvalho Chehab
Jonathan Cameron wrote: > Hi All, > >>> 3) it would be interesting to patch the other sensor drivers to be >>> compatible >>>with soc_camera (mt9v011/ov7670); >> Well, this could be done, yes, but does it make sense to do this blindly >> without any hardware to test? I would rather add such

Re: [PULL] soc-camera and mediabus

2009-12-14 Thread Mauro Carvalho Chehab
Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > On Mon, 14 Dec 2009, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > >> Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: >>> Hi Mauro, >>> >>> At last soc-camera and mediabus lot for 2.6.33. Note, that one of this >>> patches adds new fourcc codes. A patch for their documentation will be >>> submitted

Re: [PULL] soc-camera and mediabus

2009-12-14 Thread Jonathan Cameron
Hi All, >> 3) it would be interesting to patch the other sensor drivers to be compatible >>with soc_camera (mt9v011/ov7670); > > Well, this could be done, yes, but does it make sense to do this blindly > without any hardware to test? I would rather add such conversions on a > one-by-one bas

Re: [PULL] soc-camera and mediabus

2009-12-14 Thread Guennadi Liakhovetski
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > Hi Mauro, > > > > At last soc-camera and mediabus lot for 2.6.33. Note, that one of this > > patches adds new fourcc codes. A patch for their documentation will be > > submitted immediately. > > > > Please pul

Re: [PULL] soc-camera and mediabus

2009-12-14 Thread Mauro Carvalho Chehab
Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > Hi Mauro, > > At last soc-camera and mediabus lot for 2.6.33. Note, that one of this > patches adds new fourcc codes. A patch for their documentation will be > submitted immediately. > > Please pull from http://linuxtv.org/hg/~gliakhovetski/v4l-dvb > > for the fo

[PULL] soc-camera and mediabus

2009-12-11 Thread Guennadi Liakhovetski
Hi Mauro, At last soc-camera and mediabus lot for 2.6.33. Note, that one of this patches adds new fourcc codes. A patch for their documentation will be submitted immediately. Please pull from http://linuxtv.org/hg/~gliakhovetski/v4l-dvb for the following 30 changesets: 01/30: tw9910: The driv