Hi Laurent,
On Wed, 01 Oct 2014 00:00:50 +0300 Laurent Pinchart laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com wrote:
Hi Boris,
On Tuesday 30 September 2014 11:44:23 Boris Brezillon wrote:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2014 10:39:53 +0200 Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 09:37:57AM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:
On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 23:41:09 +0300 Laurent Pinchart wrote:
[...]
Incidentally, patch 2/5 in this series is missing a documentation update ;-)
Yep, regarding this patch, I wonder if it's really necessary to add new formats to the v4l2_mbus_pixelcode enum. If we want to move to this new common definition (across the video related subsytems), we should deprecate the old enum v4l2_mbus_pixelcode, and this start by not adding new formats, don't you think ?
I agree in general, but I think it could prove problematic in practice. If somebody wants to use one of the new codes but is using the V4L2 enum they have a problem.
That said, given that there is now a unified enum people will hopefully start converting drivers to it instead.
I'm more worried about user-space lib/programs as this header is part of the uapi...
But let's be optimistic here and keep porting new formats to v4l2_mbus_pixelcode enum ;-).
I think we should try to keep the two in sync, until we can remove the v4l2_mbus_pixelcode enum (I know, I'm being utopian here).
However, I really want all pixel codes to be properly documented, regardless of whether we add them to v4l2_mbus_pixelcode or not.
Anyway, I still don't know where to put the documentation. Dropping a new video format doc without any context (I mean subdev-formats.xml is included in media documentation, but there's no generic video doc yet) is a bit weird...
Now that's a good question. We could start a generic video docbook documentation. As I expect more infrastructure to be shared between V4L2 and DRM (and, who knows, FBDEV...) over time, I think that would be a good move. However docbook doesn't seem to be in the DRM developers' good books, so this might be frown upon. We could also use a plain text, kerneldoc-like format for the common documentation, but the formats would then disappear from the V4L2 documentation, which isn't a very good idea. For that reason I would favour docbook.
I've CC'ed Hans Verkuil who might want to share his opinion on the matter.
I started to write a video-formats.xml file (actually I copied the subdev-formats.xml file and renamed v4l2-mbus into video-bus :-)), but these files cannot be used without the proper video_api.tmpl file, and I don't feel like I'm the one that should start writing this documentation (or at least I'd need some help).
Anyway, even if you think I should write this doc, can we get this series mainlined first so that my HLCDC driver can make it into 3.19 ?
Best Regards,
Boris