[PATCH v3][for_v3.5] media: mx2_camera: Fix mbus format handling

[Guennadi Liakhovetski]

On Fri, 6 Jul 2012, javier Martin wrote:

> Hi Guennadi,
> 
> On 6 July 2012 13:39, Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski at gmx.de> wrote:
> > On Fri, 6 Jul 2012, javier Martin wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Guennadi,
> >>
> >> On 6 July 2012 13:09, Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski at gmx.de> wrote:
> >> > On Fri, 6 Jul 2012, javier Martin wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi,
> >> >> can this patch be applied please?
> >> >>
> >> >> It solves a BUG for 3.5. Guennadi, Fabio, could you give me an ack for this?
> >> >
> >> > Sorry? This patch has been applied and proven to break more, than it
> >> > fixed, so, it has been reverted. Am I missing something?
> >>
> >> Patch v1 was the version that broke pass-through mode (which nobody
> >> seems to be using/testing). It was applied, then it was reverted as
> >> you requested in [1].
> >>
> >> Then I sent v2 that didn't break pass-through but was invalid too
> >> because of a merge conflict [2].
> >>
> >> Finally, this is v3 which has the pass-through problem and the merge
> >> problem fixed. It is currently marked as "Under review" and should be
> >> applied as a fix to 3.5.
> >
> > Ah, ok, then, don't you think, that expecting your patch to be applied
> > within 4 minutes of its submission is a bit... overoptimistic? Because
> > it's 4 minutes after your original patch, that you've sent your
> > "reminder"...
> 
> This patch was sent on '2012-06-01 09:31:45', which is more than a
> month ago. Look at patchwork:
> http://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/11559/
> 
> I think that a month is a reasonable period to send a reminder and I
> didn't mean to offend anyone with it.

Hrm, right, sorry. Must have been blind. I've looked at v3 of your patch, 
I've got one more question to it, expect a reply in a few minutes.

Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/