Hi Hans,
> I decided to accept this patch. The only change I made was to replace the
> do_div(f_period, 2) by a bit shift.
>
> Thanks for working on this!
OK, thanks for accepting the patch! I'll pay attention to those details
when working on the following patches.
> Can you look at adding the
Hi Gabriel,
On 12/02/2018 02:45 PM, Gabriel Francisco Mandaji wrote:
> Simulate a more precise timestamp by calculating it based on the
> current framerate.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gabriel Francisco Mandaji
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - fix spelling
> - end of exposure is offset by 90% of the fr
On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 10:15 AM Hans Verkuil wrote:
>
> On 12/02/2018 09:43 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 2:47 PM Gabriel Francisco Mandaji
> > wrote:
> >
> >> @@ -667,10 +653,28 @@ static void vivid_overlay(struct vivid_dev *dev,
> >> struct vivid_buffer *buf)
> >>
On 12/02/2018 09:43 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 2:47 PM Gabriel Francisco Mandaji
> wrote:
>
>> @@ -667,10 +653,28 @@ static void vivid_overlay(struct vivid_dev *dev,
>> struct vivid_buffer *buf)
>> }
>> }
>>
>> +static void vivid_cap_update_frame_period(struct viv
On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 2:47 PM Gabriel Francisco Mandaji
wrote:
> @@ -667,10 +653,28 @@ static void vivid_overlay(struct vivid_dev *dev, struct
> vivid_buffer *buf)
> }
> }
>
> +static void vivid_cap_update_frame_period(struct vivid_dev *dev)
> +{
> + u64 f_period;
> +
> + f
Simulate a more precise timestamp by calculating it based on the
current framerate.
Signed-off-by: Gabriel Francisco Mandaji
---
Changes in v2:
- fix spelling
- end of exposure is offset by 90% of the frame period
- fix timestamp calculation for FIELD_ALTERNATE (untested)
- timest
