From patchwork Sat Jun 19 10:51:50 2021 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Jacopo Mondi X-Patchwork-Id: 12660 Return-Path: X-Original-To: parsemail@patchwork.libcamera.org Delivered-To: parsemail@patchwork.libcamera.org Received: from lancelot.ideasonboard.com (lancelot.ideasonboard.com [92.243.16.209]) by patchwork.libcamera.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D820BD78E for ; Sat, 19 Jun 2021 10:51:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lancelot.ideasonboard.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lancelot.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B20E968944; Sat, 19 Jun 2021 12:51:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay10.mail.gandi.net (relay10.mail.gandi.net [217.70.178.230]) by lancelot.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F00968940 for ; Sat, 19 Jun 2021 12:51:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: (Authenticated sender: jacopo@jmondi.org) by relay10.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 134DE240004; Sat, 19 Jun 2021 10:51:05 +0000 (UTC) From: Jacopo Mondi To: libcamera-devel@lists.libcamera.org Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2021 12:51:50 +0200 Message-Id: <20210619105151.20012-1-jacopo@jmondi.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.31.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [libcamera-devel] [RFC 0/1] android: Introduce CameraCapabilities X-BeenThere: libcamera-devel@lists.libcamera.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: libcamera-devel-bounces@lists.libcamera.org Sender: "libcamera-devel" Yeah, I know "5 files changed, 1245 insertions(+), 1159 deletions(-)" sounds scary but it's mostly about moving stuff out from camera_device.cpp to a new camera_capabilities.cpp. What I mostly care about are coments on the interface between the 2 classes (see the usage of capabilities_ in camera_device.cpp). The code has been moved without modifications if not small changes to comments here and there, so that part should be "easy" to review. I think the new layout is not too bad. Also, controls and dynamic metadata handling could then be moved to a new camera_controls.cpp which can be initialized with the static information produced by CameraCapabilities. What do you think ? No regressions detected by running CTS with libcamera subplan (run 2 times in a row) nor when testing with CCA. Thanks j Jacopo Mondi (1): android: Introduce CameraCapabilties class src/android/camera_capabilities.cpp | 1165 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ src/android/camera_capabilities.h | 64 ++ src/android/camera_device.cpp | 1147 +------------------------- src/android/camera_device.h | 27 +- src/android/meson.build | 1 + 5 files changed, 1245 insertions(+), 1159 deletions(-) create mode 100644 src/android/camera_capabilities.cpp create mode 100644 src/android/camera_capabilities.h --- 2.31.1