[PATCH 1/2] dm644x: replace the obsolete preset API by the timings API.
Hans Verkuil
hverkuil at xs4all.nl
Fri Sep 28 08:52:22 EDT 2012
Hi Prabhakar!
On Fri September 28 2012 14:44:59 Prabhakar Lad wrote:
> Hi Kevin,
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Prabhakar Lad <prabhakar.lad at ti.com> wrote:
> > From: Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil at cisco.com>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil at cisco.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Lad, Prabhakar <prabhakar.lad at ti.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Manjunath Hadli <manjunath.hadli at ti.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm644x-evm.c | 15 ++--
> > arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm644x.c | 17 +---
> > drivers/media/video/davinci/vpbe.c | 110 ++++++++++++----------------
> > drivers/media/video/davinci/vpbe_display.c | 60 +++++++--------
> > drivers/media/video/davinci/vpbe_venc.c | 25 +++---
> > include/media/davinci/vpbe.h | 14 ++--
> > include/media/davinci/vpbe_types.h | 8 +--
> > include/media/davinci/vpbe_venc.h | 2 +-
> > 8 files changed, 111 insertions(+), 140 deletions(-)
> >
> Can you ACK this patch? Since this patch needs to go from Mauro's tree
> due to changes in media drivers folder structure.
>
> Regards,
> --Prabhakar Lad
>
...
> > -static int vpbe_s_dv_preset(struct vpbe_device *vpbe_dev,
> > - struct v4l2_dv_preset *dv_preset)
> > +static int vpbe_s_dv_timings(struct vpbe_device *vpbe_dev,
> > + struct v4l2_dv_timings *dv_timings)
> > {
> > struct vpbe_config *cfg = vpbe_dev->cfg;
> > int out_index = vpbe_dev->current_out_index;
> > + struct vpbe_output *output = &cfg->outputs[out_index];
> > int sd_index = vpbe_dev->current_sd_index;
> > - int ret;
> > + int ret, i;
> >
> >
> > if (!(cfg->outputs[out_index].output.capabilities &
> > - V4L2_OUT_CAP_PRESETS))
> > + V4L2_OUT_CAP_CUSTOM_TIMINGS))
Can you make a follow-up patch that renames V4L2_IN/OUT_CAP_CUSTOM_TIMINGS to
V4L2_IN/OUT_CAP_DV_TIMINGS? The old name for this define is deprecated, so it
would be nice to fix this in this driver as well.
The code that adds the new define names went in just two days ago, so as far
as I am concerned there is no need to modify the patch again. A follow-up
patch is sufficient.
Regards,
Hans
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list