diff mbox

[media] ov2640: make GPIOLIB an optional dependency

Message ID 20170421063312.GA21434@amd (mailing list archive)
State Obsoleted, archived
Delegated to: Guennadi Liakhovetski
Headers

Commit Message

Pavel Machek April 21, 2017, 6:33 a.m. UTC 
  Hi!

> > Better solution would be for VIDEO_EM28XX_V4L2 to depend on GPIOLIB,
> > too, no? If not, should there be BUG_ON(priv->pwdn_gpio);
> > BUG_ON(priv->resetb_gpio);?
> 
> Pavel,
> 
> The em28xx driver was added upstream several years the gpio driver. 
> It controls GPIO using a different logic. It makes no sense to make
> it dependent on GPIOLIB, except if someone converts it to use it.

At least comment in the sourcecode...? Remove pwdn_gpio fields from
structure in !GPIOLIB case, because otherwise they are trap for the
programmer trying to understand what is going on?

Plus, something like this, because otherwise it is quite confusing?

Thanks,
								Pavel

Comments

Hans Verkuil June 19, 2017, 9:50 a.m. UTC | #1 
Hi Pavel,

I'm dropping this from patchwork since this no longer applies now that ov2640
has been moved out of soc_camera.

If you still want this (it is a reasonable patch), then please respin.

Regards,

	Hans

On 04/21/2017 08:33 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
>>> Better solution would be for VIDEO_EM28XX_V4L2 to depend on GPIOLIB,
>>> too, no? If not, should there be BUG_ON(priv->pwdn_gpio);
>>> BUG_ON(priv->resetb_gpio);?
>>
>> Pavel,
>>
>> The em28xx driver was added upstream several years the gpio driver.
>> It controls GPIO using a different logic. It makes no sense to make
>> it dependent on GPIOLIB, except if someone converts it to use it.
> 
> At least comment in the sourcecode...? Remove pwdn_gpio fields from
> structure in !GPIOLIB case, because otherwise they are trap for the
> programmer trying to understand what is going on?
> 
> Plus, something like this, because otherwise it is quite confusing?
> 
> Thanks,
> 								Pavel
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov2640.c b/drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov2640.c
> index 56de182..85620e1 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov2640.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov2640.c
> @@ -1060,7 +1060,7 @@ static int ov2640_hw_reset(struct device *dev)
>   		/* Active the resetb pin to perform a reset pulse */
>   		gpiod_direction_output(priv->resetb_gpio, 1);
>   		usleep_range(3000, 5000);
> -		gpiod_direction_output(priv->resetb_gpio, 0);
> +		gpiod_set_value(priv->resetb_gpio, 0);
>   	}
>   
>   	return 0;
>
Pavel Machek June 19, 2017, 10:48 a.m. UTC | #2 
Hi!

> I'm dropping this from patchwork since this no longer applies now that ov2640
> has been moved out of soc_camera.
> 
> If you still want this (it is a reasonable patch), then please
> respin.

If I'm not mistaken, equivalent fix is already in
drivers/media/i2c/ov2640.c .

Thanks,
								Pavel
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov2640.c b/drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov2640.c
index 56de182..85620e1 100644
--- a/drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov2640.c
+++ b/drivers/media/i2c/soc_camera/ov2640.c
@@ -1060,7 +1060,7 @@  static int ov2640_hw_reset(struct device *dev)
 		/* Active the resetb pin to perform a reset pulse */
 		gpiod_direction_output(priv->resetb_gpio, 1);
 		usleep_range(3000, 5000);
-		gpiod_direction_output(priv->resetb_gpio, 0);
+		gpiod_set_value(priv->resetb_gpio, 0);
 	}
 
 	return 0;