On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 00:26:12 +0100, Laurent Pinchart
laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com wrote:
On Thursday 20 March 2014 23:12:50 Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 19:52:53 +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Then we might not be talking about the same thing. I'm talking about DT
On 03/20/2014 06:23 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:16:37 +0100, Laurent Pinchart
laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com wrote:
On Tuesday 11 March 2014 14:59:20 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
So depending on the use case, the endpoints would point to opposite
direction from the encoder's
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 11:44:24 +0100, Andrzej Hajda a.ha...@samsung.com wrote:
On 03/20/2014 06:23 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:16:37 +0100, Laurent Pinchart
laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com wrote:
On Tuesday 11 March 2014 14:59:20 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
So depending on
On 20/03/14 19:01, Grant Likely wrote:
I think depending on a generic graph walk is where I have the biggest
concern about the design. I don't think it is a good idea for the master
device to try a generic walk over the graph looking for other devices
that might be components because it
On 21/03/14 13:47, Grant Likely wrote:
I'm firm on the opinion that the checking must also happen at runtime.
The biggest part of my objection has been how easy it would be to get a
linkage out of sync, and dtc is not necessarily the last tool to touch
the dtb before the kernel gets booted. I
Hi Grant,
On Friday 21 March 2014 08:15:34 Grant Likely wrote:
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 00:26:12 +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Thursday 20 March 2014 23:12:50 Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 19:52:53 +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Then we might not be talking about the same
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Laurent Pinchart
laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com wrote:
Hi Grant,
On Friday 21 March 2014 08:15:34 Grant Likely wrote:
Why don't we instead try a Google Hangout or a phone call today.
Anywhere between 11:30 and 14:00 GMT would work for me. I'd offer to
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:16:20 +0200, Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkei...@ti.com
wrote:
On 21/03/14 13:47, Grant Likely wrote:
I'm firm on the opinion that the checking must also happen at runtime.
The biggest part of my objection has been how easy it would be to get a
linkage out of sync, and
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 16:15:37 +0100, Laurent Pinchart
laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com wrote:
Hi Grant,
On Monday 10 March 2014 14:58:15 Grant Likely wrote:
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:52:53 +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Monday 10 March 2014 12:18:20 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 08/03/14
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:43:44 +0100, Laurent Pinchart
laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com wrote:
Hi Philipp,
On Monday 10 March 2014 16:40:30 Philipp Zabel wrote:
Am Montag, den 10.03.2014, 16:15 +0100 schrieb Laurent Pinchart:
On Monday 10 March 2014 14:58:15 Grant Likely wrote:
On
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:16:37 +0100, Laurent Pinchart
laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com wrote:
On Tuesday 11 March 2014 14:59:20 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
So depending on the use case, the endpoints would point to opposite
direction from the encoder's point of view.
And if I gathered Grant's
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:04:34 +0100, Andrzej Hajda a.ha...@samsung.com wrote:
On 03/10/2014 04:15 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Hi Grant,
On Monday 10 March 2014 14:58:15 Grant Likely wrote:
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:52:53 +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Monday 10 March 2014 12:18:20 Tomi
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 16:07:00 +0100, Philipp Zabel p.za...@pengutronix.de
wrote:
Hi Grant,
Am Montag, den 10.03.2014, 14:58 + schrieb Grant Likely:
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:52:53 +0100, Laurent Pinchart
laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com wrote:
On Monday 10 March 2014 12:18:20 Tomi
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 16:21:49 +0100, Laurent Pinchart
laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com wrote:
Hi Philipp,
On Tuesday 11 March 2014 16:07:00 Philipp Zabel wrote:
Am Montag, den 10.03.2014, 14:58 + schrieb Grant Likely:
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:52:53 +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 10:25:56 +, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 02:52:53PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
In theory unidirectional links in DT are indeed enough. However, let's not
forget the following.
- There's no such thing as
On Thursday 20 March 2014 17:54:31 Grant Likely wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 10:25:56 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 02:52:53PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
In theory unidirectional links in DT are indeed enough. However, let's
not forget the following.
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 07:16:29PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Thursday 20 March 2014 17:54:31 Grant Likely wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 10:25:56 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 02:52:53PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
In theory unidirectional links in
Em Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:54:31 +
Grant Likely grant.lik...@linaro.org escreveu:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 10:25:56 +, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 02:52:53PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
In theory unidirectional links in DT are indeed
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 03:38:04PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
Em Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:54:31 +
Grant Likely grant.lik...@linaro.org escreveu:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 10:25:56 +, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 02:52:53PM +0100,
On Thursday 20 March 2014 18:43:16 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 03:38:04PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
Em Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:54:31 + Grant Likely escreveu:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 10:25:56 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 15:38:04 -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab
m.che...@samsung.com wrote:
Em Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:54:31 +
Grant Likely grant.lik...@linaro.org escreveu:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 10:25:56 +, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at
Hi Russell,
On Thursday 20 March 2014 18:18:20 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 07:16:29PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Thursday 20 March 2014 17:54:31 Grant Likely wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 10:25:56 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
[snip]
I believe
On Thursday 20 March 2014 18:48:16 Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 15:38:04 -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
Em Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:54:31 + Grant Likely escreveu:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 10:25:56 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 02:52:53PM +0100,
Hi Russell,
On Thursday 20 March 2014 18:18:20 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 07:16:29PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Thursday 20 March 2014 17:54:31 Grant Likely wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 10:25:56 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Mon, Mar 10,
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 19:52:53 +0100, Laurent Pinchart
laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com wrote:
On Thursday 20 March 2014 18:48:16 Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 15:38:04 -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
Em Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:54:31 + Grant Likely escreveu:
On Wed, 12 Mar
Hi Grant,
On Thursday 20 March 2014 23:12:50 Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 19:52:53 +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Thursday 20 March 2014 18:48:16 Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 15:38:04 -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
Em Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:54:31 + Grant
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 02:52:53PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
In theory unidirectional links in DT are indeed enough. However, let's not
forget the following.
- There's no such thing as single start points for graphs. Sure, in some
simple cases the graph will have a single start point,
On 12/03/14 12:25, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 02:52:53PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
In theory unidirectional links in DT are indeed enough. However, let's not
forget the following.
- There's no such thing as single start points for graphs. Sure, in some
Hi Russell and Tomi,
On Wednesday 12 March 2014 12:47:09 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 12/03/14 12:25, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 02:52:53PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
In theory unidirectional links in DT are indeed enough. However, let's
not forget the
Hi Philipp,
On Monday 10 March 2014 16:40:30 Philipp Zabel wrote:
Am Montag, den 10.03.2014, 16:15 +0100 schrieb Laurent Pinchart:
On Monday 10 March 2014 14:58:15 Grant Likely wrote:
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:52:53 +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Monday 10 March 2014 12:18:20 Tomi
On 11/03/14 13:43, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
We could scan the whole tree for entities, ports and endpoints once, in
the base oftree code, and put that into a graph structure, adding the
backlinks.
The of_graph_* helpers could then use that graph instead of the device
tree.
That could work.
On 03/10/2014 04:15 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Hi Grant,
On Monday 10 March 2014 14:58:15 Grant Likely wrote:
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:52:53 +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Monday 10 March 2014 12:18:20 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 08/03/14 13:41, Grant Likely wrote:
Ok. If we go for single
Hi Tomi,
On Tuesday 11 March 2014 14:59:20 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 11/03/14 13:43, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
We could scan the whole tree for entities, ports and endpoints once, in
the base oftree code, and put that into a graph structure, adding the
backlinks. The of_graph_* helpers could
On 11/03/14 15:16, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
And if I gathered Grant's opinion correctly (correct me if I'm wrong),
he thinks things should be explicit, i.e. the bindings for, say, an
encoder should state that the encoder's output endpoint _must_ contain a
remote-endpoint property, whereas the
Hi,
Am Dienstag, den 11.03.2014, 15:27 +0200 schrieb Tomi Valkeinen:
On 11/03/14 15:16, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
And if I gathered Grant's opinion correctly (correct me if I'm wrong),
he thinks things should be explicit, i.e. the bindings for, say, an
encoder should state that the
Hi Grant,
Am Montag, den 10.03.2014, 14:58 + schrieb Grant Likely:
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:52:53 +0100, Laurent Pinchart
laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com wrote:
On Monday 10 March 2014 12:18:20 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 08/03/14 13:41, Grant Likely wrote:
Ok. If we go for single
Hi Philipp,
On Tuesday 11 March 2014 16:07:00 Philipp Zabel wrote:
Am Montag, den 10.03.2014, 14:58 + schrieb Grant Likely:
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:52:53 +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
[snip]
In theory unidirectional links in DT are indeed enough. However, let's
not forget the
Hi Laurent,
Am Dienstag, den 11.03.2014, 16:21 +0100 schrieb Laurent Pinchart:
Hi Philipp,
On Tuesday 11 March 2014 16:07:00 Philipp Zabel wrote:
Am Montag, den 10.03.2014, 14:58 + schrieb Grant Likely:
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:52:53 +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
[snip]
In
On 08/03/14 13:41, Grant Likely wrote:
Ok. If we go for single directional link, the question is then: which
way? And is the direction different for display and camera, which are
kind of reflections of each other?
In general I would recommend choosing whichever device you would
sensibly
On Monday 10 March 2014 12:18:20 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 08/03/14 13:41, Grant Likely wrote:
Ok. If we go for single directional link, the question is then: which
way? And is the direction different for display and camera, which are
kind of reflections of each other?
In general I
On 10/03/14 15:52, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
In theory unidirectional links in DT are indeed enough. However, let's not
forget the following.
- There's no such thing as single start points for graphs. Sure, in some
simple cases the graph will have a single start point, but that's not a
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:18:20 +0200, Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkei...@ti.com
wrote:
On 08/03/14 13:41, Grant Likely wrote:
Ok. If we go for single directional link, the question is then: which
way? And is the direction different for display and camera, which are
kind of reflections of each
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:52:53 +0100, Laurent Pinchart
laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com wrote:
On Monday 10 March 2014 12:18:20 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 08/03/14 13:41, Grant Likely wrote:
Ok. If we go for single directional link, the question is then: which
way? And is the direction
Hi Grant,
On Monday 10 March 2014 14:58:15 Grant Likely wrote:
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:52:53 +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Monday 10 March 2014 12:18:20 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 08/03/14 13:41, Grant Likely wrote:
Ok. If we go for single directional link, the question is then: which
Am Montag, den 10.03.2014, 16:15 +0100 schrieb Laurent Pinchart:
Hi Grant,
On Monday 10 March 2014 14:58:15 Grant Likely wrote:
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:52:53 +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Monday 10 March 2014 12:18:20 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 08/03/14 13:41, Grant Likely wrote:
On 07/03/14 19:05, Grant Likely wrote:
On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 15:48:49 +0100, Philipp Zabel p.za...@pengutronix.de
wrote:
Hi Grant,
thank you for the comments.
Hi Philipp,
I've got lots of comments and quesitons below, but I must say thank you
for doing this. It is a helpful description.
On 07/03/14 19:06, Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 10:36:36 +0200, Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkei...@ti.com
wrote:
On 26/02/14 16:48, Philipp Zabel wrote:
I would like the document to acknowledge the difference from the
phandle+args pattern used elsewhere and a description of when it
On Sat, 8 Mar 2014 12:33:12 +0200, Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkei...@ti.com wrote:
On 07/03/14 19:05, Grant Likely wrote:
On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 15:48:49 +0100, Philipp Zabel p.za...@pengutronix.de
wrote:
Hi Grant,
thank you for the comments.
Hi Philipp,
I've got lots of comments
On Sat, Mar 08, 2014 at 01:05:50AM +0800, Grant Likely wrote:
On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 15:48:49 +0100, Philipp Zabel p.za...@pengutronix.de
wrote:
Or two separate display controllers with two parallel outputs each, a
4-port multiplexer, and an encoder (e.g. lvds):
,--.
On 03/08/2014 12:41 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
Another thought. In terms of the pattern, I would add a recommendation
that there should be a way to identify ports of a particular type. ie.
If I were using the pattern to implement an patch bay of DSP filters,
where each input and output,
On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 15:48:49 +0100, Philipp Zabel p.za...@pengutronix.de
wrote:
Hi Grant,
thank you for the comments.
Hi Philipp,
I've got lots of comments and quesitons below, but I must say thank you
for doing this. It is a helpful description.
Am Mittwoch, den 26.02.2014, 11:01 +
On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 10:36:36 +0200, Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkei...@ti.com
wrote:
On 26/02/14 16:48, Philipp Zabel wrote:
I would like the document to acknowledge the difference from the
phandle+args pattern used elsewhere and a description of when it would
be appropriate to use this
On 26/02/14 16:48, Philipp Zabel wrote:
I would like the document to acknowledge the difference from the
phandle+args pattern used elsewhere and a description of when it would
be appropriate to use this instead of a simpler binding.
Alright. The main point of this binding is that the
On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 18:36:29 +0100, Philipp Zabel p.za...@pengutronix.de
wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 18.02.2014, 16:26 + schrieb Grant Likely:
You can find it under
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/video-interfaces.txt
Okay, I think I'm okay with moving the helpers, but I
Hi Grant,
thank you for the comments.
Am Mittwoch, den 26.02.2014, 11:01 + schrieb Grant Likely:
On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 18:36:29 +0100, Philipp Zabel p.za...@pengutronix.de
wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 18.02.2014, 16:26 + schrieb Grant Likely:
You can find it under
Am Dienstag, den 18.02.2014, 16:26 + schrieb Grant Likely:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 08:06:24 +0100, Sascha Hauer s.ha...@pengutronix.de
wrote:
Hi Grant,
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 06:14:51PM +, Grant Likely wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 07:56:33 -0600, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com
On 17/02/14 19:14, Grant Likely wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 07:56:33 -0600, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Philipp Zabel p.za...@pengutronix.de
wrote:
From: Philipp Zabel philipp.za...@gmail.com
This patch moves the parsing helpers used to
Hi Grant,
Am Montag, den 17.02.2014, 18:14 + schrieb Grant Likely:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 07:56:33 -0600, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Philipp Zabel p.za...@pengutronix.de
wrote:
From: Philipp Zabel philipp.za...@gmail.com
This patch
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 08:06:24 +0100, Sascha Hauer s.ha...@pengutronix.de wrote:
Hi Grant,
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 06:14:51PM +, Grant Likely wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 07:56:33 -0600, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Philipp Zabel
On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 07:56:33 -0600, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Philipp Zabel p.za...@pengutronix.de wrote:
From: Philipp Zabel philipp.za...@gmail.com
This patch moves the parsing helpers used to parse connected graphs
in the device tree,
Hi Grant,
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 06:14:51PM +, Grant Likely wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 07:56:33 -0600, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Philipp Zabel p.za...@pengutronix.de
wrote:
From: Philipp Zabel philipp.za...@gmail.com
This patch
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Philipp Zabel p.za...@pengutronix.de wrote:
From: Philipp Zabel philipp.za...@gmail.com
This patch moves the parsing helpers used to parse connected graphs
in the device tree, like the video interface bindings documented in
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 07:56:33AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Philipp Zabel p.za...@pengutronix.de wrote:
This allows to reuse the same parser code from outside the V4L2 framework,
most importantly from display drivers. There have been patches that
duplicate
Hi Russell,
On Tuesday 11 February 2014 14:52:48 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 07:56:33AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Philipp Zabel wrote:
This allows to reuse the same parser code from outside the V4L2
framework, most importantly
Hi Rob,
Am Dienstag, den 11.02.2014, 07:56 -0600 schrieb Rob Herring:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Philipp Zabel p.za...@pengutronix.de wrote:
From: Philipp Zabel philipp.za...@gmail.com
This patch moves the parsing helpers used to parse connected graphs
in the device tree, like the
Am Dienstag, den 11.02.2014, 16:23 +0100 schrieb Laurent Pinchart:
Hi Russell,
On Tuesday 11 February 2014 14:52:48 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 07:56:33AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Philipp Zabel wrote:
This allows to reuse
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 8:52 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 07:56:33AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Philipp Zabel p.za...@pengutronix.de
wrote:
This allows to reuse the same parser code from outside the V4L2
(adding Guennadi to Cc)
On 11/02/14 17:36, Philipp Zabel wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 11.02.2014, 16:23 +0100 schrieb Laurent Pinchart:
Hi Russell,
On Tuesday 11 February 2014 14:52:48 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 07:56:33AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11,
Hi Philipp,
On Tuesday 11 February 2014 17:36:57 Philipp Zabel wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 11.02.2014, 16:23 +0100 schrieb Laurent Pinchart:
On Tuesday 11 February 2014 14:52:48 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 07:56:33AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014
Em Tue, 11 Feb 2014 18:22:34 +0100
Sylwester Nawrocki s.nawro...@samsung.com escreveu:
(adding Guennadi to Cc)
On 11/02/14 17:36, Philipp Zabel wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 11.02.2014, 16:23 +0100 schrieb Laurent Pinchart:
Hi Russell,
On Tuesday 11 February 2014 14:52:48 Russell King - ARM
On Wed, 12 Feb 2014, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
Em Tue, 11 Feb 2014 18:22:34 +0100
Sylwester Nawrocki s.nawro...@samsung.com escreveu:
(adding Guennadi to Cc)
On 11/02/14 17:36, Philipp Zabel wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 11.02.2014, 16:23 +0100 schrieb Laurent Pinchart:
Hi Russell,
Hi Sylwester,
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 06:22:34PM +0100, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
drivers/media sounds like a good alternative to me.
I would just remove also v4l2_of_{parse/get}* and update the users
to call of_graph_* directly, there should not be many of them.
For now I'd like to skip
72 matches
Mail list logo
