On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 04:54:01PM +0100, ext Aguirre, Sergio wrote: > Hi Laurent and David,
Hi Sergio, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Laurent Pinchart [mailto:laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com] > > Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 4:33 AM > > To: David Cohen > > Cc: Aguirre, Sergio; linux-media@vger.kernel.org > > Subject: Re: [omap3isp][PATCH v2 5/9] omap3isp: Remove unused CBUFF > > register access > > > > Hi David, > > > > On Friday 19 November 2010 11:19:44 David Cohen wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 03:29:57PM +0100, ext Sergio Aguirre wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > > > > @@ -244,26 +239,6 @@ > > > > > > > > #define ISP_CSIB_SYSCONFIG ISPCCP2_SYSCONFIG > > > > #define ISP_CSIA_SYSCONFIG ISPCSI2_SYSCONFIG > > > > > > > > -/* ISP_CBUFF Registers */ > > > > - > > > > -#define ISP_CBUFF_SYSCONFIG (0x010) > > > > -#define ISP_CBUFF_IRQENABLE (0x01C) > > > > - > > > > -#define ISP_CBUFF0_CTRL (0x020) > > > > -#define ISP_CBUFF1_CTRL (0x024) > > > > - > > > > -#define ISP_CBUFF0_START (0x040) > > > > -#define ISP_CBUFF1_START (0x044) > > > > - > > > > -#define ISP_CBUFF0_END (0x050) > > > > -#define ISP_CBUFF1_END (0x054) > > > > - > > > > -#define ISP_CBUFF0_WINDOWSIZE (0x060) > > > > -#define ISP_CBUFF1_WINDOWSIZE (0x064) > > > > - > > > > -#define ISP_CBUFF0_THRESHOLD (0x070) > > > > -#define ISP_CBUFF1_THRESHOLD (0x074) > > > > - > > > > > > No need to remove the registers from header file. We're not using them > > > on current version, but it doesn't mean we won't use ever. :) > > > > I would have made the same comment for other registers, but we're not > > using > > the CBUFF module at all here, with no plans to use it in the future. It > > might > > not be worth it keeping the register definitions. I have no strong feeling > > about it, I'm fine with both choices. > > David, > > IMO, we should not introduce dead code/unusued defines in the first omap3isp > upstream version. I think it's already quite hard to review for somebody > outside the omap3isp development team. > > Having all this just in case will most probably end up in bulk, as we > might never implement the CBUFF HW block, as Laurent mentions. That's a good point. I see no problem in removing it in that case. Br, David > > I'll be more biased on all this being re-added if we end up implementing a > ispcbuff submodule. > > Regards, > Sergio > > > > > > -- > > Regards, > > > > Laurent Pinchart > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
