On 8/27/19 11:23 AM, Jacopo Mondi wrote:
> Report the native pixel array size and the crop bounds for the ov5670
> sensor driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi <jac...@jmondi.org>
> ---
> drivers/media/i2c/ov5670.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/ov5670.c b/drivers/media/i2c/ov5670.c
> index 2bc57e85f721..3e22fe9ccad1 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/ov5670.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/ov5670.c
> @@ -2258,6 +2258,25 @@ static int ov5670_set_pad_format(struct v4l2_subdev
> *sd,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int ov5670_get_selection(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
> + struct v4l2_subdev_pad_config *cfg,
> + struct v4l2_subdev_selection *sel)
> +{
> + switch (sel->target) {
> + case V4L2_SEL_TGT_CROP_BOUNDS:
> + case V4L2_SEL_TGT_NATIVE_SIZE:
> + sel->r.left = 0;
> + sel->r.top = 0;
> + sel->r.width = 2592;
> + sel->r.height = 1944;
Why do you need this?
Since the format can change for this and the next driver I think CROP_BOUNDS
at least should match the current format.
I don't think this patch and the next have anything to do with the
location/rotate
support. I would split it off from this series.
Regards,
Hans
> + break;
> + default:
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> static int ov5670_get_skip_frames(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u32 *frames)
> {
> *frames = OV5670_NUM_OF_SKIP_FRAMES;
> @@ -2425,6 +2444,7 @@ static const struct v4l2_subdev_pad_ops ov5670_pad_ops
> = {
> .enum_mbus_code = ov5670_enum_mbus_code,
> .get_fmt = ov5670_get_pad_format,
> .set_fmt = ov5670_set_pad_format,
> + .get_selection = ov5670_get_selection,
> .enum_frame_size = ov5670_enum_frame_size,
> };
>
>
