[PATCH 05/14] media: add a V4L2 OF parser
Guennadi Liakhovetski
g.liakhovetski at gmx.de
Mon Oct 8 23:23:25 EST 2012
Hi Hans
On Fri, 5 Oct 2012, Hans Verkuil wrote:
[snip]
> I think the soc_camera patches should be left out for now. I suspect that
> by adding core support for async i2c handling first,
Ok, let's think, what this meacs - async I2C in media / V4L2 core.
The main reason for our probing order problem is the master clock,
typically supplied from the camera bridge to I2C subdevices, which we only
want to start when necessary, i.e. when accessing the subdevice. And the
subdevice driver needs that clock running during its .probe() to be able
to access and verify or configure the hardware. Our current solution is to
not register I2C subdevices from the platform data, as is usual for all
I2C devices, but from the bridge driver and only after it has switched on
the master clock. After the subdevice driver has completed its probing we
switch the clock back off until the subdevice has to be activated, e.g.
for video capture.
Also important - when we want to unregister the bridge driver we just also
unregister the I2C device.
Now, to reverse the whole thing and to allow I2C devices be registered as
usual - via platform data or OF, first of all we have to teach I2C
subdevice drivers to recognise the "too early" situation and request
deferred probing in such a case. Then it will be reprobed after each new
successful probe or unregister on the system. After the bridge driver has
successfully probed the subdevice driver will be re-probed and at that
time it should succeed. Now, there is a problem here too: who should
switch on and off the master clock?
If we do it from the bridge driver, we could install an I2C bus-notifier,
_before_ the subdevice driver is probed, i.e. upon the
BUS_NOTIFY_BIND_DRIVER event we could turn on the clock. If subdevice
probing was successful, we can then wait for the BUS_NOTIFY_BOUND_DRIVER
event to switch the clock back off. BUT - if the subdevice fails probing?
How do we find out about that and turn the clock back off? There is no
notification event for that... Possible solutions:
1. timer - ugly and unreliable.
2. add a "probing failed" notifier event to the device core - would this
be accepted?
3. let the subdevice turn the master clock on and off for the duration of
probing.
My vote goes for (3). Ideally this should be done using the generic clock
framework. But can we really expect all drivers and platforms to switch to
it quickly enough? If not, we need a V4L2-specific callback from subdevice
drivers to bridge drivers to turn the clock on and off. That's what I've
done "temporarily" in this patch series for soc-camera.
Suppose we decide to do the same for V4L2 centrally - add call-backs. Then
we can think what else we need to add to V4L2 to support asynchronous
subdevice driver probing.
1. We'll have to create these V4L2 clock start and stop functions, that,
supplied (in case of I2C) with client address and adapter number will find
the correct v4l2_device instance and call its callbacks.
2. The I2C notifier. I'm not sure, whether this one should be common. Of
common tasks we have to refcount the I2C adapter and register the
subdevice. Then we'd have to call the bridge driver's callback. Is it
worth it doing this centrally or rather allow individual drivers to do
that themselves?
Also, ideally OF-compatible (I2C) drivers should run with no platform
data, but soc-camera is using I2C device platform data intensively. To
avoid modifying the soc-camera core and all drivers, I also trigger on the
BUS_NOTIFY_BIND_DRIVER event and assign a reference to the dynamically
created platform data to the I2C device. Would we also want to do this for
all V4L2 bridge drivers? We could call this a "prepare" callback or
something similar...
3. Bridge driver unregistering. Here we have to put the subdevice driver
back into the deferred-probe state... Ugliness alert: I'm doing this by
unregistering and re-registering the I2C device... For that I also have to
create a copy of devices I2C board-info data. Lovely, ain't it? This I'd
be happy to move to the V4L2 core;-)
Thanks
Guennadi
> the soc_camera patches
> will become a lot easier to understand.
>
> Regards,
>
> Hans
>
> >
> > Thanks
> > Guennadi
> > ---
> > Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
> > Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
> > http://www.open-technology.de/
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >
>
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
More information about the devicetree-discuss
mailing list