Hi Hans
Not that awkward, the user has to use the brand new
v4l2_ctrl_ptr_create() ;). But if you prefer void * I can make the
change.
Regards
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 2:17 PM Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-ci...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> On 10/14/19 4:14 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
> > This allows setting the default value on compound controls created via
> > v4l2_ctrl_new_custom.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ricardo Ribalda Delgado <riba...@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-ctrls.c | 2 +-
> > include/media/v4l2-ctrls.h | 2 ++
> > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-ctrls.c
> > b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-ctrls.c
> > index bf50d37ef6c1..12cf38f73f7b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-ctrls.c
> > +++ b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-ctrls.c
> > @@ -2583,7 +2583,7 @@ struct v4l2_ctrl *v4l2_ctrl_new_custom(struct
> > v4l2_ctrl_handler *hdl,
> > type, min, max,
> > is_menu ? cfg->menu_skip_mask : step, def,
> > cfg->dims, cfg->elem_size,
> > - flags, qmenu, qmenu_int, ptr_null, priv);
> > + flags, qmenu, qmenu_int, cfg->p_def, priv);
> > if (ctrl)
> > ctrl->is_private = cfg->is_private;
> > return ctrl;
> > diff --git a/include/media/v4l2-ctrls.h b/include/media/v4l2-ctrls.h
> > index 26205ba3a0a0..2fca5b823961 100644
> > --- a/include/media/v4l2-ctrls.h
> > +++ b/include/media/v4l2-ctrls.h
> > @@ -375,6 +375,7 @@ struct v4l2_ctrl_handler {
> > * @max: The control's maximum value.
> > * @step: The control's step value for non-menu controls.
> > * @def: The control's default value.
> > + * @p_def: The control's default value for compound controls.
> > * @dims: The size of each dimension.
> > * @elem_size: The size in bytes of the control.
> > * @flags: The control's flags.
> > @@ -403,6 +404,7 @@ struct v4l2_ctrl_config {
> > s64 max;
> > u64 step;
> > s64 def;
> > + union v4l2_ctrl_ptr p_def;
> > u32 dims[V4L2_CTRL_MAX_DIMS];
> > u32 elem_size;
> > u32 flags;
> >
>
> I'm not sure about this. It might be a bit awkward to initialize p_def given
> that it is a union.
>
> Perhaps a simple void pointer would be easier?
>
> Regards,
>
> Hans
