From patchwork Fri Sep 11 16:20:33 2020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Jacopo Mondi X-Patchwork-Id: 9573 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 B1C96BDB1D for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 16:16:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lancelot.ideasonboard.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lancelot.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 478FB62D99; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 18:16:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay1-d.mail.gandi.net (relay1-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.193]) by lancelot.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F55960534 for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 18:16:54 +0200 (CEST) X-Originating-IP: 93.34.118.233 Received: from uno.lan (93-34-118-233.ip49.fastwebnet.it [93.34.118.233]) (Authenticated sender: jacopo@jmondi.org) by relay1-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 907BB24000A; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 16:16:53 +0000 (UTC) From: Jacopo Mondi To: libcamera-devel@lists.libcamera.org Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 18:20:33 +0200 Message-Id: <20200911162039.61933-1-jacopo@jmondi.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.28.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [libcamera-devel] [RFC 0/6] libcamera: Define draft controls and properties 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: , Cc: hanlinchen@chromium.org Errors-To: libcamera-devel-bounces@lists.libcamera.org Sender: "libcamera-devel" Hello, this RFC follows [PATCH 0/2] libcamera: controls: Define draft controls from which I've taken patches 1 and 3 Compared to that 1st version I also added a few properties and wired 3 draft properties and one control in the IPU3 pipeline handler. Why an RFC ? because the final goal would be to wire them up in Android HAL but I cannot test at the moment with CTS (we have a test case that fails because we don't report the pipeline depth and I would like to see it solved). I think 1/6 could be pushed if no one is against it. Thanks j Jacopo Mondi (6): libcamera: controls: Define AwbLocked control libcamera: property_ids: Define draft properties libcamera: control_ids: Define draft controls libcamera: pipeline_handler: Initialize properties_ libcamera: ipu3: Initialize draft properties libcamera: ipu3: Report pipeline depth include/libcamera/internal/pipeline_handler.h | 3 +- src/libcamera/control_ids.yaml | 264 ++++++++++++++++++ src/libcamera/pipeline/ipu3/ipu3.cpp | 19 +- src/libcamera/property_ids.yaml | 70 +++++ 4 files changed, 354 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) --- 2.28.0