V4L/DVB (11024): soc-camera: separate S_FMT and S_CROP operations
As host and camera drivers become more complex, differences between S_FMT and
S_CROP functionality grow, this patch separates them.
Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@redhat.com>
diff --git a/drivers/media/video/mt9t031.c b/drivers/media/video/mt9t031.c
index acc1fa9..677be18 100644
--- a/drivers/media/video/mt9t031.c
+++ b/drivers/media/video/mt9t031.c
@@ -213,36 +213,14 @@
icd->height_max = MT9T031_MAX_HEIGHT / yskip;
}
-static int mt9t031_set_fmt(struct soc_camera_device *icd,
- __u32 pixfmt, struct v4l2_rect *rect)
+static int mt9t031_set_params(struct soc_camera_device *icd,
+ struct v4l2_rect *rect, u16 xskip, u16 yskip)
{
struct mt9t031 *mt9t031 = container_of(icd, struct mt9t031, icd);
int ret;
+ u16 xbin, ybin, width, height, left, top;
const u16 hblank = MT9T031_HORIZONTAL_BLANK,
vblank = MT9T031_VERTICAL_BLANK;
- u16 xbin, xskip, ybin, yskip, width, height, left, top;
-
- if (pixfmt) {
- /*
- * try_fmt has put rectangle within limits.
- * S_FMT - use binning and skipping for scaling, recalculate
- * limits, used for cropping
- */
- /* Is this more optimal than just a division? */
- for (xskip = 8; xskip > 1; xskip--)
- if (rect->width * xskip <= MT9T031_MAX_WIDTH)
- break;
-
- for (yskip = 8; yskip > 1; yskip--)
- if (rect->height * yskip <= MT9T031_MAX_HEIGHT)
- break;
-
- recalculate_limits(icd, xskip, yskip);
- } else {
- /* CROP - no change in scaling, or in limits */
- xskip = mt9t031->xskip;
- yskip = mt9t031->yskip;
- }
/* Make sure we don't exceed sensor limits */
if (rect->left + rect->width > icd->width_max)
@@ -289,7 +267,7 @@
if (ret >= 0)
ret = reg_write(icd, MT9T031_VERTICAL_BLANKING, vblank);
- if (pixfmt) {
+ if (yskip != mt9t031->yskip || xskip != mt9t031->xskip) {
/* Binning, skipping */
if (ret >= 0)
ret = reg_write(icd, MT9T031_COLUMN_ADDRESS_MODE,
@@ -325,15 +303,58 @@
}
}
- if (!ret && pixfmt) {
+ /* Re-enable register update, commit all changes */
+ if (ret >= 0)
+ ret = reg_clear(icd, MT9T031_OUTPUT_CONTROL, 1);
+
+ return ret < 0 ? ret : 0;
+}
+
+static int mt9t031_set_crop(struct soc_camera_device *icd,
+ struct v4l2_rect *rect)
+{
+ struct mt9t031 *mt9t031 = container_of(icd, struct mt9t031, icd);
+
+ /* CROP - no change in scaling, or in limits */
+ return mt9t031_set_params(icd, rect, mt9t031->xskip, mt9t031->yskip);
+}
+
+static int mt9t031_set_fmt(struct soc_camera_device *icd,
+ struct v4l2_format *f)
+{
+ struct mt9t031 *mt9t031 = container_of(icd, struct mt9t031, icd);
+ int ret;
+ u16 xskip, yskip;
+ struct v4l2_rect rect = {
+ .left = icd->x_current,
+ .top = icd->y_current,
+ .width = f->fmt.pix.width,
+ .height = f->fmt.pix.height,
+ };
+
+ /*
+ * try_fmt has put rectangle within limits.
+ * S_FMT - use binning and skipping for scaling, recalculate
+ * limits, used for cropping
+ */
+ /* Is this more optimal than just a division? */
+ for (xskip = 8; xskip > 1; xskip--)
+ if (rect.width * xskip <= MT9T031_MAX_WIDTH)
+ break;
+
+ for (yskip = 8; yskip > 1; yskip--)
+ if (rect.height * yskip <= MT9T031_MAX_HEIGHT)
+ break;
+
+ recalculate_limits(icd, xskip, yskip);
+
+ ret = mt9t031_set_params(icd, &rect, xskip, yskip);
+ if (!ret) {
mt9t031->xskip = xskip;
mt9t031->yskip = yskip;
}
- /* Re-enable register update, commit all changes */
- reg_clear(icd, MT9T031_OUTPUT_CONTROL, 1);
-
- return ret < 0 ? ret : 0;
+ return ret;
}
static int mt9t031_try_fmt(struct soc_camera_device *icd,
@@ -470,6 +491,7 @@
.release = mt9t031_release,
.start_capture = mt9t031_start_capture,
.stop_capture = mt9t031_stop_capture,
+ .set_crop = mt9t031_set_crop,
.set_fmt = mt9t031_set_fmt,
.try_fmt = mt9t031_try_fmt,
.set_bus_param = mt9t031_set_bus_param,
