| Message ID | 20210430150219.299389-1-kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Delegated to: | Kieran Bingham |
| Headers | show |
| Series |
|
| Related | show |
Hi Kieran, Thank you for the patch. On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 04:02:19PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: > The libcamera Android HAL implementation should not be an integral part > of libcamera, but a support library that utilises the libcamera public > API. > > Move the implementation to it's own distinct library. > > Signed-off-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com> > --- > > Please note that this no longer requires ChromeOS to manually symlink > into the camera_hal directory. > > A modification similar to the following should be applied to the Chrome > ebuilds if this is applied: > > diff --git a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild > index 433357f1ef74..cf90e438cfb3 100644 > --- a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild > +++ b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild > @@ -57,6 +57,4 @@ src_compile() { > > src_install() { > meson_src_install > - > - dosym ../libcamera.so "/usr/$(get_libdir)/camera_hal/libcamera.so" > } Could you submit a patch to CrOS ? > src/android/meson.build | 10 ++++++++++ > src/libcamera/meson.build | 11 ----------- > src/meson.build | 7 +++---- > 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/android/meson.build b/src/android/meson.build > index 2be20c97e118..6170448a73ce 100644 > --- a/src/android/meson.build > +++ b/src/android/meson.build > @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ > android_deps = [ > dependency('libexif', required : get_option('android')), > dependency('libjpeg', required : get_option('android')), > + libcamera_dep, > ] > > android_enabled = true > @@ -66,3 +67,12 @@ android_camera_metadata = static_library('camera_metadata', > android_camera_metadata_sources, > c_args : '-Wno-shadow', > include_directories : android_includes) > + > +android_hal = shared_library('android-hal', android-hal.so won't be a very descriptive name. Maybe libcamera-hal.so ? > + android_hal_sources, > + name_prefix : '', > + link_with : android_camera_metadata, > + install : true, > + cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, > + include_directories : android_includes, > + dependencies : android_deps) Without install_dir, this will get installed in /usr/lib/, which isn't where the CrOS camera service will look for it. We probably need a configuration option to set the path, as it will differ between CrOS and Android. > diff --git a/src/libcamera/meson.build b/src/libcamera/meson.build > index e0a48aa23ea5..f77b80b878d8 100644 > --- a/src/libcamera/meson.build > +++ b/src/libcamera/meson.build > @@ -129,16 +129,6 @@ libcamera_deps = [ > dependency('threads'), > ] > > -libcamera_link_with = [] > - > -if android_enabled > - libcamera_sources += android_hal_sources > - includes += android_includes > - libcamera_link_with += android_camera_metadata > - > - libcamera_deps += android_deps > -endif > - > # We add '/' to the build_rpath as a 'safe' path to act as a boolean flag. > # The build_rpath is stripped at install time by meson, so we determine at > # runtime if the library is running from an installed location by checking > @@ -147,7 +137,6 @@ endif > libcamera = shared_library('camera', > libcamera_sources, > install : true, > - link_with : libcamera_link_with, > cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, > include_directories : includes, > objects : libcamera_objects, > diff --git a/src/meson.build b/src/meson.build > index 64d22b9ce5b6..9dc32751bbb1 100644 > --- a/src/meson.build > +++ b/src/meson.build > @@ -31,11 +31,10 @@ endif > libcamera_cpp_args = [] > libcamera_objects = [] > > -# The 'android' subdir must be processed first, and the build targets > -# are included directly into the libcamera library when this is enabled. > -subdir('android') > - > +# libcamera must be built first as a dependency to the other components. > subdir('libcamera') This is really nice, having android first has been bugging me for a while. > + > +subdir('android') > subdir('ipa') > > subdir('lc-compliance')
Hi Laurent, On 01/05/2021 21:54, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Kieran, > > Thank you for the patch. > > On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 04:02:19PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: >> The libcamera Android HAL implementation should not be an integral part >> of libcamera, but a support library that utilises the libcamera public >> API. >> >> Move the implementation to it's own distinct library. >> >> Signed-off-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com> >> --- >> >> Please note that this no longer requires ChromeOS to manually symlink >> into the camera_hal directory. >> >> A modification similar to the following should be applied to the Chrome >> ebuilds if this is applied: >> >> diff --git a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild >> index 433357f1ef74..cf90e438cfb3 100644 >> --- a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild >> +++ b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild >> @@ -57,6 +57,4 @@ src_compile() { >> >> src_install() { >> meson_src_install >> - >> - dosym ../libcamera.so "/usr/$(get_libdir)/camera_hal/libcamera.so" >> } > > Could you submit a patch to CrOS ? > >> src/android/meson.build | 10 ++++++++++ >> src/libcamera/meson.build | 11 ----------- >> src/meson.build | 7 +++---- >> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/src/android/meson.build b/src/android/meson.build >> index 2be20c97e118..6170448a73ce 100644 >> --- a/src/android/meson.build >> +++ b/src/android/meson.build >> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ >> android_deps = [ >> dependency('libexif', required : get_option('android')), >> dependency('libjpeg', required : get_option('android')), >> + libcamera_dep, >> ] >> >> android_enabled = true >> @@ -66,3 +67,12 @@ android_camera_metadata = static_library('camera_metadata', >> android_camera_metadata_sources, >> c_args : '-Wno-shadow', >> include_directories : android_includes) >> + >> +android_hal = shared_library('android-hal', > > android-hal.so won't be a very descriptive name. Maybe libcamera-hal.so I started out with libcamera-hal, but then I decided I didn't like it so I updated to android-hal ... Given that this is an android-hal implementation I thought that was /more/ descriptive ... otherwise libcamera-hal sounds like it's an abstraction layer of libcamera. If you prefer libcamera-hal I'll change it back. > ? > >> + android_hal_sources, >> + name_prefix : '', >> + link_with : android_camera_metadata, >> + install : true, >> + cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, >> + include_directories : android_includes, >> + dependencies : android_deps) > > Without install_dir, this will get installed in /usr/lib/, which isn't > where the CrOS camera service will look for it. We probably need a > configuration option to set the path, as it will differ between CrOS and > Android. But I have install_dir ... uhm ... Ok so I forgot to save out the updated patch before sending ... It's there in the next version already ;-) ... > +android_installdir = get_option('libdir') > + > if get_option('android_platform') == 'cros' > libcamera_cpp_args += [ '-DOS_CHROMEOS'] > + android_installdir = get_option('libdir') / 'camera_hal' > endif Will install it to camera_hal directly when the platform is set. >> diff --git a/src/libcamera/meson.build b/src/libcamera/meson.build >> index e0a48aa23ea5..f77b80b878d8 100644 >> --- a/src/libcamera/meson.build >> +++ b/src/libcamera/meson.build >> @@ -129,16 +129,6 @@ libcamera_deps = [ >> dependency('threads'), >> ] >> >> -libcamera_link_with = [] >> - >> -if android_enabled >> - libcamera_sources += android_hal_sources >> - includes += android_includes >> - libcamera_link_with += android_camera_metadata >> - >> - libcamera_deps += android_deps >> -endif >> - >> # We add '/' to the build_rpath as a 'safe' path to act as a boolean flag. >> # The build_rpath is stripped at install time by meson, so we determine at >> # runtime if the library is running from an installed location by checking >> @@ -147,7 +137,6 @@ endif >> libcamera = shared_library('camera', >> libcamera_sources, >> install : true, >> - link_with : libcamera_link_with, >> cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, >> include_directories : includes, >> objects : libcamera_objects, >> diff --git a/src/meson.build b/src/meson.build >> index 64d22b9ce5b6..9dc32751bbb1 100644 >> --- a/src/meson.build >> +++ b/src/meson.build >> @@ -31,11 +31,10 @@ endif >> libcamera_cpp_args = [] >> libcamera_objects = [] >> >> -# The 'android' subdir must be processed first, and the build targets >> -# are included directly into the libcamera library when this is enabled. >> -subdir('android') >> - >> +# libcamera must be built first as a dependency to the other components. >> subdir('libcamera') > > This is really nice, having android first has been bugging me for a > while. Me to, I somehow assumed last time I looked at this that there were deeper reasons for integrating into the libcamera.so - but there wasn't anything preventing the split really. Anyway, v2 to come anyway with the correct install paths, and if desired - a rename. -- Kieran > >> + >> +subdir('android') >> subdir('ipa') >> >> subdir('lc-compliance') >
Hi Kieran, On Sun, May 02, 2021 at 09:02:45PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: > On 01/05/2021 21:54, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 04:02:19PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: > >> The libcamera Android HAL implementation should not be an integral part > >> of libcamera, but a support library that utilises the libcamera public > >> API. > >> > >> Move the implementation to it's own distinct library. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com> > >> --- > >> > >> Please note that this no longer requires ChromeOS to manually symlink > >> into the camera_hal directory. > >> > >> A modification similar to the following should be applied to the Chrome > >> ebuilds if this is applied: > >> > >> diff --git a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild > >> index 433357f1ef74..cf90e438cfb3 100644 > >> --- a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild > >> +++ b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild > >> @@ -57,6 +57,4 @@ src_compile() { > >> > >> src_install() { > >> meson_src_install > >> - > >> - dosym ../libcamera.so "/usr/$(get_libdir)/camera_hal/libcamera.so" > >> } > > > > Could you submit a patch to CrOS ? > > > >> src/android/meson.build | 10 ++++++++++ > >> src/libcamera/meson.build | 11 ----------- > >> src/meson.build | 7 +++---- > >> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/src/android/meson.build b/src/android/meson.build > >> index 2be20c97e118..6170448a73ce 100644 > >> --- a/src/android/meson.build > >> +++ b/src/android/meson.build > >> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ > >> android_deps = [ > >> dependency('libexif', required : get_option('android')), > >> dependency('libjpeg', required : get_option('android')), > >> + libcamera_dep, > >> ] > >> > >> android_enabled = true > >> @@ -66,3 +67,12 @@ android_camera_metadata = static_library('camera_metadata', > >> android_camera_metadata_sources, > >> c_args : '-Wno-shadow', > >> include_directories : android_includes) > >> + > >> +android_hal = shared_library('android-hal', > > > > android-hal.so won't be a very descriptive name. Maybe libcamera-hal.so > > I started out with libcamera-hal, but then I decided I didn't like it so > I updated to android-hal ... > > Given that this is an android-hal implementation I thought that was > /more/ descriptive ... > > otherwise libcamera-hal sounds like it's an abstraction layer of libcamera. > > If you prefer libcamera-hal I'll change it back. Following that logic, every shared object on a Linux system should be called linux-* :-) Given that we may have different HAL implementations in the same directory (both multiple camera HAL implementations in Chrome OS, and multiple HALs for unrelated devices in Android), it's important for the file name to specify the project and possibly the fact that it's related to cameras. With 'libcamera' as the project name, both goals are reached :-) > > ? > > > >> + android_hal_sources, > >> + name_prefix : '', > >> + link_with : android_camera_metadata, > >> + install : true, > >> + cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, > >> + include_directories : android_includes, > >> + dependencies : android_deps) > > > > Without install_dir, this will get installed in /usr/lib/, which isn't > > where the CrOS camera service will look for it. We probably need a > > configuration option to set the path, as it will differ between CrOS and > > Android. > > But I have install_dir ... uhm ... Ok so I forgot to save out the > updated patch before sending ... > > It's there in the next version already ;-) ... > > > +android_installdir = get_option('libdir') > > + > > if get_option('android_platform') == 'cros' > > libcamera_cpp_args += [ '-DOS_CHROMEOS'] Extra space. > > + android_installdir = get_option('libdir') / 'camera_hal' > > endif > > Will install it to camera_hal directly when the platform is set. Should install be set to true on CrOS only ? On Android meson isn't used anyway, and on other systems, the Android HAL isn't needed. > >> diff --git a/src/libcamera/meson.build b/src/libcamera/meson.build > >> index e0a48aa23ea5..f77b80b878d8 100644 > >> --- a/src/libcamera/meson.build > >> +++ b/src/libcamera/meson.build > >> @@ -129,16 +129,6 @@ libcamera_deps = [ > >> dependency('threads'), > >> ] > >> > >> -libcamera_link_with = [] > >> - > >> -if android_enabled > >> - libcamera_sources += android_hal_sources > >> - includes += android_includes > >> - libcamera_link_with += android_camera_metadata > >> - > >> - libcamera_deps += android_deps > >> -endif > >> - > >> # We add '/' to the build_rpath as a 'safe' path to act as a boolean flag. > >> # The build_rpath is stripped at install time by meson, so we determine at > >> # runtime if the library is running from an installed location by checking > >> @@ -147,7 +137,6 @@ endif > >> libcamera = shared_library('camera', > >> libcamera_sources, > >> install : true, > >> - link_with : libcamera_link_with, > >> cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, > >> include_directories : includes, > >> objects : libcamera_objects, > >> diff --git a/src/meson.build b/src/meson.build > >> index 64d22b9ce5b6..9dc32751bbb1 100644 > >> --- a/src/meson.build > >> +++ b/src/meson.build > >> @@ -31,11 +31,10 @@ endif > >> libcamera_cpp_args = [] > >> libcamera_objects = [] > >> > >> -# The 'android' subdir must be processed first, and the build targets > >> -# are included directly into the libcamera library when this is enabled. > >> -subdir('android') > >> - > >> +# libcamera must be built first as a dependency to the other components. > >> subdir('libcamera') > > > > This is really nice, having android first has been bugging me for a > > while. > > Me to, I somehow assumed last time I looked at this that there were > deeper reasons for integrating into the libcamera.so - but there wasn't > anything preventing the split really. > > Anyway, v2 to come anyway with the correct install paths, and if desired > - a rename. > > >> + > >> +subdir('android') > >> subdir('ipa') > >> > >> subdir('lc-compliance')
Hi Laurent, On 03/05/2021 08:58, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Kieran, > > On Sun, May 02, 2021 at 09:02:45PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: >> On 01/05/2021 21:54, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>> On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 04:02:19PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: >>>> The libcamera Android HAL implementation should not be an integral part >>>> of libcamera, but a support library that utilises the libcamera public >>>> API. >>>> >>>> Move the implementation to it's own distinct library. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> Please note that this no longer requires ChromeOS to manually symlink >>>> into the camera_hal directory. >>>> >>>> A modification similar to the following should be applied to the Chrome >>>> ebuilds if this is applied: >>>> >>>> diff --git a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild >>>> index 433357f1ef74..cf90e438cfb3 100644 >>>> --- a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild >>>> +++ b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild >>>> @@ -57,6 +57,4 @@ src_compile() { >>>> >>>> src_install() { >>>> meson_src_install >>>> - >>>> - dosym ../libcamera.so "/usr/$(get_libdir)/camera_hal/libcamera.so" >>>> } >>> >>> Could you submit a patch to CrOS ? >>> >>>> src/android/meson.build | 10 ++++++++++ >>>> src/libcamera/meson.build | 11 ----------- >>>> src/meson.build | 7 +++---- >>>> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/src/android/meson.build b/src/android/meson.build >>>> index 2be20c97e118..6170448a73ce 100644 >>>> --- a/src/android/meson.build >>>> +++ b/src/android/meson.build >>>> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ >>>> android_deps = [ >>>> dependency('libexif', required : get_option('android')), >>>> dependency('libjpeg', required : get_option('android')), >>>> + libcamera_dep, >>>> ] >>>> >>>> android_enabled = true >>>> @@ -66,3 +67,12 @@ android_camera_metadata = static_library('camera_metadata', >>>> android_camera_metadata_sources, >>>> c_args : '-Wno-shadow', >>>> include_directories : android_includes) >>>> + >>>> +android_hal = shared_library('android-hal', >>> >>> android-hal.so won't be a very descriptive name. Maybe libcamera-hal.so >> >> I started out with libcamera-hal, but then I decided I didn't like it so >> I updated to android-hal ... >> >> Given that this is an android-hal implementation I thought that was >> /more/ descriptive ... >> >> otherwise libcamera-hal sounds like it's an abstraction layer of libcamera. >> >> If you prefer libcamera-hal I'll change it back. > > Following that logic, every shared object on a Linux system should be > called linux-* :-) Given that we may have different HAL implementations> in the same directory (both multiple camera HAL implementations in > Chrome OS, and multiple HALs for unrelated devices in Android), it's > important for the file name to specify the project and possibly the fact > that it's related to cameras. With 'libcamera' as the project name, both > goals are reached :-) Well ... maybe the Linux Abstraction Layer for Android could be called linux-hal (ok, too meta, because Android is on top of Linux) ... but the difference is the perspective. If this was installed on android then yes, I see your point - but we don't (currently) install on android, only chrome ;-) - where it is the 'android-hal' much like the 'libc' is the c library... I guess it could be the libcamera-android-hal.so too Perhaps if Chrome decided not to use the Android HAL but to use a wrapper on top of libcamera directly, I could imagine that could be called the libcamera-hal for instance. -- Kieran >>> ? >>> >>>> + android_hal_sources, >>>> + name_prefix : '', >>>> + link_with : android_camera_metadata, >>>> + install : true, >>>> + cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, >>>> + include_directories : android_includes, >>>> + dependencies : android_deps) >>> >>> Without install_dir, this will get installed in /usr/lib/, which isn't >>> where the CrOS camera service will look for it. We probably need a >>> configuration option to set the path, as it will differ between CrOS and >>> Android. >> >> But I have install_dir ... uhm ... Ok so I forgot to save out the >> updated patch before sending ... >> >> It's there in the next version already ;-) ... >> >>> +android_installdir = get_option('libdir') >>> + >>> if get_option('android_platform') == 'cros' >>> libcamera_cpp_args += [ '-DOS_CHROMEOS'] > > Extra space. > >>> + android_installdir = get_option('libdir') / 'camera_hal' >>> endif >> >> Will install it to camera_hal directly when the platform is set. > > Should install be set to true on CrOS only ? On Android meson isn't used > anyway, and on other systems, the Android HAL isn't needed. If it isn't needed, then don't build it (i.e. don't enable android)? And if it doesn't need to be installed (i.e. just compile testing) well then there's no need to call the install ... >>>> diff --git a/src/libcamera/meson.build b/src/libcamera/meson.build >>>> index e0a48aa23ea5..f77b80b878d8 100644 >>>> --- a/src/libcamera/meson.build >>>> +++ b/src/libcamera/meson.build >>>> @@ -129,16 +129,6 @@ libcamera_deps = [ >>>> dependency('threads'), >>>> ] >>>> >>>> -libcamera_link_with = [] >>>> - >>>> -if android_enabled >>>> - libcamera_sources += android_hal_sources >>>> - includes += android_includes >>>> - libcamera_link_with += android_camera_metadata >>>> - >>>> - libcamera_deps += android_deps >>>> -endif >>>> - >>>> # We add '/' to the build_rpath as a 'safe' path to act as a boolean flag. >>>> # The build_rpath is stripped at install time by meson, so we determine at >>>> # runtime if the library is running from an installed location by checking >>>> @@ -147,7 +137,6 @@ endif >>>> libcamera = shared_library('camera', >>>> libcamera_sources, >>>> install : true, >>>> - link_with : libcamera_link_with, >>>> cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, >>>> include_directories : includes, >>>> objects : libcamera_objects, >>>> diff --git a/src/meson.build b/src/meson.build >>>> index 64d22b9ce5b6..9dc32751bbb1 100644 >>>> --- a/src/meson.build >>>> +++ b/src/meson.build >>>> @@ -31,11 +31,10 @@ endif >>>> libcamera_cpp_args = [] >>>> libcamera_objects = [] >>>> >>>> -# The 'android' subdir must be processed first, and the build targets >>>> -# are included directly into the libcamera library when this is enabled. >>>> -subdir('android') >>>> - >>>> +# libcamera must be built first as a dependency to the other components. >>>> subdir('libcamera') >>> >>> This is really nice, having android first has been bugging me for a >>> while. >> >> Me to, I somehow assumed last time I looked at this that there were >> deeper reasons for integrating into the libcamera.so - but there wasn't >> anything preventing the split really. >> >> Anyway, v2 to come anyway with the correct install paths, and if desired >> - a rename. >> >>>> + >>>> +subdir('android') >>>> subdir('ipa') >>>> >>>> subdir('lc-compliance') >
Hi Laurent, On 03/05/2021 08:58, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Kieran, >>> +android_installdir = get_option('libdir') >>> + >>> if get_option('android_platform') == 'cros' >>> libcamera_cpp_args += [ '-DOS_CHROMEOS'] > > Extra space. Not my addition. But I'll fix it up in the same patch. It shouldn't be too obfuscating. Oh - this indent is also only three spaces, so I'll also push it up to four as well. >>> + android_installdir = get_option('libdir') / 'camera_hal' >>> endif >>
On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 09:13:31AM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: > Hi Laurent, > > On 03/05/2021 08:58, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > Hi Kieran, > > > > On Sun, May 02, 2021 at 09:02:45PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: > >> On 01/05/2021 21:54, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >>> On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 04:02:19PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: > >>>> The libcamera Android HAL implementation should not be an integral part > >>>> of libcamera, but a support library that utilises the libcamera public > >>>> API. > >>>> > >>>> Move the implementation to it's own distinct library. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com> > >>>> --- > >>>> > >>>> Please note that this no longer requires ChromeOS to manually symlink > >>>> into the camera_hal directory. > >>>> > >>>> A modification similar to the following should be applied to the Chrome > >>>> ebuilds if this is applied: > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild > >>>> index 433357f1ef74..cf90e438cfb3 100644 > >>>> --- a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild > >>>> +++ b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild > >>>> @@ -57,6 +57,4 @@ src_compile() { > >>>> > >>>> src_install() { > >>>> meson_src_install > >>>> - > >>>> - dosym ../libcamera.so "/usr/$(get_libdir)/camera_hal/libcamera.so" > >>>> } > >>> > >>> Could you submit a patch to CrOS ? > >>> > >>>> src/android/meson.build | 10 ++++++++++ > >>>> src/libcamera/meson.build | 11 ----------- > >>>> src/meson.build | 7 +++---- > >>>> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/src/android/meson.build b/src/android/meson.build > >>>> index 2be20c97e118..6170448a73ce 100644 > >>>> --- a/src/android/meson.build > >>>> +++ b/src/android/meson.build > >>>> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ > >>>> android_deps = [ > >>>> dependency('libexif', required : get_option('android')), > >>>> dependency('libjpeg', required : get_option('android')), > >>>> + libcamera_dep, > >>>> ] > >>>> > >>>> android_enabled = true > >>>> @@ -66,3 +67,12 @@ android_camera_metadata = static_library('camera_metadata', > >>>> android_camera_metadata_sources, > >>>> c_args : '-Wno-shadow', > >>>> include_directories : android_includes) > >>>> + > >>>> +android_hal = shared_library('android-hal', > >>> > >>> android-hal.so won't be a very descriptive name. Maybe libcamera-hal.so > >> > >> I started out with libcamera-hal, but then I decided I didn't like it so > >> I updated to android-hal ... > >> > >> Given that this is an android-hal implementation I thought that was > >> /more/ descriptive ... > >> > >> otherwise libcamera-hal sounds like it's an abstraction layer of libcamera. > >> > >> If you prefer libcamera-hal I'll change it back. > > > > Following that logic, every shared object on a Linux system should be > > called linux-* :-) Given that we may have different HAL implementations> in the same directory (both multiple camera HAL implementations in > > Chrome OS, and multiple HALs for unrelated devices in Android), it's > > important for the file name to specify the project and possibly the fact > > that it's related to cameras. With 'libcamera' as the project name, both > > goals are reached :-) > > Well ... maybe the Linux Abstraction Layer for Android could be called > linux-hal (ok, too meta, because Android is on top of Linux) ... but the > difference is the perspective. If this was installed on android then > yes, I see your point - but we don't (currently) install on android, > only chrome ;-) - where it is the 'android-hal' much like the 'libc' is > the c library... > > I guess it could be the libcamera-android-hal.so too > > Perhaps if Chrome decided not to use the Android HAL but to use a > wrapper on top of libcamera directly, I could imagine that could be > called the libcamera-hal for instance. There are more HALs than the camera HAL on Android, there's one for audio, for graphicss, for sensors (as in motion sensors), ... Those other HALs are possibly not used on Chrome OS (not entirely sure though), but it's not just about cameras. > >>> ? > >>> > >>>> + android_hal_sources, > >>>> + name_prefix : '', > >>>> + link_with : android_camera_metadata, > >>>> + install : true, > >>>> + cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, > >>>> + include_directories : android_includes, > >>>> + dependencies : android_deps) > >>> > >>> Without install_dir, this will get installed in /usr/lib/, which isn't > >>> where the CrOS camera service will look for it. We probably need a > >>> configuration option to set the path, as it will differ between CrOS and > >>> Android. > >> > >> But I have install_dir ... uhm ... Ok so I forgot to save out the > >> updated patch before sending ... > >> > >> It's there in the next version already ;-) ... > >> > >>> +android_installdir = get_option('libdir') > >>> + > >>> if get_option('android_platform') == 'cros' > >>> libcamera_cpp_args += [ '-DOS_CHROMEOS'] > > > > Extra space. > > > >>> + android_installdir = get_option('libdir') / 'camera_hal' > >>> endif > >> > >> Will install it to camera_hal directly when the platform is set. > > > > Should install be set to true on CrOS only ? On Android meson isn't used > > anyway, and on other systems, the Android HAL isn't needed. > > If it isn't needed, then don't build it (i.e. don't enable android)? > > And if it doesn't need to be installed (i.e. just compile testing) well > then there's no need to call the install ... Fair enough. > >>>> diff --git a/src/libcamera/meson.build b/src/libcamera/meson.build > >>>> index e0a48aa23ea5..f77b80b878d8 100644 > >>>> --- a/src/libcamera/meson.build > >>>> +++ b/src/libcamera/meson.build > >>>> @@ -129,16 +129,6 @@ libcamera_deps = [ > >>>> dependency('threads'), > >>>> ] > >>>> > >>>> -libcamera_link_with = [] > >>>> - > >>>> -if android_enabled > >>>> - libcamera_sources += android_hal_sources > >>>> - includes += android_includes > >>>> - libcamera_link_with += android_camera_metadata > >>>> - > >>>> - libcamera_deps += android_deps > >>>> -endif > >>>> - > >>>> # We add '/' to the build_rpath as a 'safe' path to act as a boolean flag. > >>>> # The build_rpath is stripped at install time by meson, so we determine at > >>>> # runtime if the library is running from an installed location by checking > >>>> @@ -147,7 +137,6 @@ endif > >>>> libcamera = shared_library('camera', > >>>> libcamera_sources, > >>>> install : true, > >>>> - link_with : libcamera_link_with, > >>>> cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, > >>>> include_directories : includes, > >>>> objects : libcamera_objects, > >>>> diff --git a/src/meson.build b/src/meson.build > >>>> index 64d22b9ce5b6..9dc32751bbb1 100644 > >>>> --- a/src/meson.build > >>>> +++ b/src/meson.build > >>>> @@ -31,11 +31,10 @@ endif > >>>> libcamera_cpp_args = [] > >>>> libcamera_objects = [] > >>>> > >>>> -# The 'android' subdir must be processed first, and the build targets > >>>> -# are included directly into the libcamera library when this is enabled. > >>>> -subdir('android') > >>>> - > >>>> +# libcamera must be built first as a dependency to the other components. > >>>> subdir('libcamera') > >>> > >>> This is really nice, having android first has been bugging me for a > >>> while. > >> > >> Me to, I somehow assumed last time I looked at this that there were > >> deeper reasons for integrating into the libcamera.so - but there wasn't > >> anything preventing the split really. > >> > >> Anyway, v2 to come anyway with the correct install paths, and if desired > >> - a rename. > >> > >>>> + > >>>> +subdir('android') > >>>> subdir('ipa') > >>>> > >>>> subdir('lc-compliance') > > > > -- > Regards > -- > Kieran
Hello, On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 09:13:31AM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: > Hi Laurent, > > On 03/05/2021 08:58, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > Hi Kieran, > > > > On Sun, May 02, 2021 at 09:02:45PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: > >> On 01/05/2021 21:54, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >>> On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 04:02:19PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: > >>>> The libcamera Android HAL implementation should not be an integral part > >>>> of libcamera, but a support library that utilises the libcamera public > >>>> API. > >>>> > >>>> Move the implementation to it's own distinct library. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com> > >>>> --- > >>>> > >>>> Please note that this no longer requires ChromeOS to manually symlink > >>>> into the camera_hal directory. > >>>> > >>>> A modification similar to the following should be applied to the Chrome > >>>> ebuilds if this is applied: > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild > >>>> index 433357f1ef74..cf90e438cfb3 100644 > >>>> --- a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild > >>>> +++ b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild > >>>> @@ -57,6 +57,4 @@ src_compile() { > >>>> > >>>> src_install() { > >>>> meson_src_install > >>>> - > >>>> - dosym ../libcamera.so "/usr/$(get_libdir)/camera_hal/libcamera.so" > >>>> } > >>> > >>> Could you submit a patch to CrOS ? > >>> > >>>> src/android/meson.build | 10 ++++++++++ > >>>> src/libcamera/meson.build | 11 ----------- > >>>> src/meson.build | 7 +++---- > >>>> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/src/android/meson.build b/src/android/meson.build > >>>> index 2be20c97e118..6170448a73ce 100644 > >>>> --- a/src/android/meson.build > >>>> +++ b/src/android/meson.build > >>>> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ > >>>> android_deps = [ > >>>> dependency('libexif', required : get_option('android')), > >>>> dependency('libjpeg', required : get_option('android')), > >>>> + libcamera_dep, > >>>> ] > >>>> > >>>> android_enabled = true > >>>> @@ -66,3 +67,12 @@ android_camera_metadata = static_library('camera_metadata', > >>>> android_camera_metadata_sources, > >>>> c_args : '-Wno-shadow', > >>>> include_directories : android_includes) > >>>> + > >>>> +android_hal = shared_library('android-hal', > >>> > >>> android-hal.so won't be a very descriptive name. Maybe libcamera-hal.so > >> > >> I started out with libcamera-hal, but then I decided I didn't like it so > >> I updated to android-hal ... > >> > >> Given that this is an android-hal implementation I thought that was > >> /more/ descriptive ... > >> > >> otherwise libcamera-hal sounds like it's an abstraction layer of libcamera. > >> > >> If you prefer libcamera-hal I'll change it back. > > > > Following that logic, every shared object on a Linux system should be > > called linux-* :-) Given that we may have different HAL implementations> in the same directory (both multiple camera HAL implementations in > > Chrome OS, and multiple HALs for unrelated devices in Android), it's > > important for the file name to specify the project and possibly the fact > > that it's related to cameras. With 'libcamera' as the project name, both > > goals are reached :-) > > Well ... maybe the Linux Abstraction Layer for Android could be called > linux-hal (ok, too meta, because Android is on top of Linux) ... but the > difference is the perspective. If this was installed on android then > yes, I see your point - but we don't (currently) install on android, > only chrome ;-) - where it is the 'android-hal' much like the 'libc' is > the c library... FWIW I second naming the newly introduced .so as libcamera-hal.so. As an example Cros currently ships two HALs on Soraka, intel and usb. Both implement the Android Camera3 API, why aren't they both called android-hal.so ? The HAL naming scheme usually reports the platform/camera manufacturer (unless you know there will always be a single HAL on your systems, so you can call it camera.so and that's it). Having 'libcamera' in the name is important to make sure we won't conflict with other components at install time, as they can claim to be the 'android-hal' of the system as well. Not to mention Android has several HAL, one for each subsystem, so this should at least be 'camera-hal.so' if we want to stay generic. Furthermore HAL is a pretty Android-specific thing, I don't think it needs to have 'android' in the name to make clear what API we implement. > > I guess it could be the libcamera-android-hal.so too Repeating 'android' in the 'hal' name is of no use imho. libcamera-hal.so is a perfectly fine name for the libcamera-based camera HAL. What are you afraid this can be confused with ? > > Perhaps if Chrome decided not to use the Android HAL but to use a > wrapper on top of libcamera directly, I could imagine that could be > called the libcamera-hal for instance. They would call into libcamera.so in that case, don't they ? What's the purpose of an HAL if not to behave like an HAL? HAL is not just a naming suffix, but a combination of the right exported symbols and the right C-API that makes it possible for the library to be loaded at run-time by the Android framework, and all of this is -very- Android specific. Thanks j > > -- > Kieran > > > >>> ? > >>> > >>>> + android_hal_sources, > >>>> + name_prefix : '', > >>>> + link_with : android_camera_metadata, > >>>> + install : true, > >>>> + cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, > >>>> + include_directories : android_includes, > >>>> + dependencies : android_deps) > >>> > >>> Without install_dir, this will get installed in /usr/lib/, which isn't > >>> where the CrOS camera service will look for it. We probably need a > >>> configuration option to set the path, as it will differ between CrOS and > >>> Android. > >> > >> But I have install_dir ... uhm ... Ok so I forgot to save out the > >> updated patch before sending ... > >> > >> It's there in the next version already ;-) ... > >> > >>> +android_installdir = get_option('libdir') > >>> + > >>> if get_option('android_platform') == 'cros' > >>> libcamera_cpp_args += [ '-DOS_CHROMEOS'] > > > > Extra space. > > > >>> + android_installdir = get_option('libdir') / 'camera_hal' > >>> endif > >> > >> Will install it to camera_hal directly when the platform is set. > > > > Should install be set to true on CrOS only ? On Android meson isn't used > > anyway, and on other systems, the Android HAL isn't needed. > > If it isn't needed, then don't build it (i.e. don't enable android)? > > And if it doesn't need to be installed (i.e. just compile testing) well > then there's no need to call the install ... > > > > >>>> diff --git a/src/libcamera/meson.build b/src/libcamera/meson.build > >>>> index e0a48aa23ea5..f77b80b878d8 100644 > >>>> --- a/src/libcamera/meson.build > >>>> +++ b/src/libcamera/meson.build > >>>> @@ -129,16 +129,6 @@ libcamera_deps = [ > >>>> dependency('threads'), > >>>> ] > >>>> > >>>> -libcamera_link_with = [] > >>>> - > >>>> -if android_enabled > >>>> - libcamera_sources += android_hal_sources > >>>> - includes += android_includes > >>>> - libcamera_link_with += android_camera_metadata > >>>> - > >>>> - libcamera_deps += android_deps > >>>> -endif > >>>> - > >>>> # We add '/' to the build_rpath as a 'safe' path to act as a boolean flag. > >>>> # The build_rpath is stripped at install time by meson, so we determine at > >>>> # runtime if the library is running from an installed location by checking > >>>> @@ -147,7 +137,6 @@ endif > >>>> libcamera = shared_library('camera', > >>>> libcamera_sources, > >>>> install : true, > >>>> - link_with : libcamera_link_with, > >>>> cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, > >>>> include_directories : includes, > >>>> objects : libcamera_objects, > >>>> diff --git a/src/meson.build b/src/meson.build > >>>> index 64d22b9ce5b6..9dc32751bbb1 100644 > >>>> --- a/src/meson.build > >>>> +++ b/src/meson.build > >>>> @@ -31,11 +31,10 @@ endif > >>>> libcamera_cpp_args = [] > >>>> libcamera_objects = [] > >>>> > >>>> -# The 'android' subdir must be processed first, and the build targets > >>>> -# are included directly into the libcamera library when this is enabled. > >>>> -subdir('android') > >>>> - > >>>> +# libcamera must be built first as a dependency to the other components. > >>>> subdir('libcamera') > >>> > >>> This is really nice, having android first has been bugging me for a > >>> while. > >> > >> Me to, I somehow assumed last time I looked at this that there were > >> deeper reasons for integrating into the libcamera.so - but there wasn't > >> anything preventing the split really. > >> > >> Anyway, v2 to come anyway with the correct install paths, and if desired > >> - a rename. > >> > >>>> + > >>>> +subdir('android') > >>>> subdir('ipa') > >>>> > >>>> subdir('lc-compliance') > > > > -- > Regards > -- > Kieran > _______________________________________________ > libcamera-devel mailing list > libcamera-devel@lists.libcamera.org > https://lists.libcamera.org/listinfo/libcamera-devel
Hi Jacopo, On 03/05/2021 09:29, Jacopo Mondi wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 09:13:31AM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: >> Hi Laurent, >> >> On 03/05/2021 08:58, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>> Hi Kieran, >>> >>> On Sun, May 02, 2021 at 09:02:45PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: >>>> On 01/05/2021 21:54, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 04:02:19PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: >>>>>> The libcamera Android HAL implementation should not be an integral part >>>>>> of libcamera, but a support library that utilises the libcamera public >>>>>> API. >>>>>> >>>>>> Move the implementation to it's own distinct library. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> >>>>>> Please note that this no longer requires ChromeOS to manually symlink >>>>>> into the camera_hal directory. >>>>>> >>>>>> A modification similar to the following should be applied to the Chrome >>>>>> ebuilds if this is applied: >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild >>>>>> index 433357f1ef74..cf90e438cfb3 100644 >>>>>> --- a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild >>>>>> +++ b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild >>>>>> @@ -57,6 +57,4 @@ src_compile() { >>>>>> >>>>>> src_install() { >>>>>> meson_src_install >>>>>> - >>>>>> - dosym ../libcamera.so "/usr/$(get_libdir)/camera_hal/libcamera.so" >>>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> Could you submit a patch to CrOS ? >>>>> >>>>>> src/android/meson.build | 10 ++++++++++ >>>>>> src/libcamera/meson.build | 11 ----------- >>>>>> src/meson.build | 7 +++---- >>>>>> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/src/android/meson.build b/src/android/meson.build >>>>>> index 2be20c97e118..6170448a73ce 100644 >>>>>> --- a/src/android/meson.build >>>>>> +++ b/src/android/meson.build >>>>>> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ >>>>>> android_deps = [ >>>>>> dependency('libexif', required : get_option('android')), >>>>>> dependency('libjpeg', required : get_option('android')), >>>>>> + libcamera_dep, >>>>>> ] >>>>>> >>>>>> android_enabled = true >>>>>> @@ -66,3 +67,12 @@ android_camera_metadata = static_library('camera_metadata', >>>>>> android_camera_metadata_sources, >>>>>> c_args : '-Wno-shadow', >>>>>> include_directories : android_includes) >>>>>> + >>>>>> +android_hal = shared_library('android-hal', >>>>> >>>>> android-hal.so won't be a very descriptive name. Maybe libcamera-hal.so >>>> >>>> I started out with libcamera-hal, but then I decided I didn't like it so >>>> I updated to android-hal ... >>>> >>>> Given that this is an android-hal implementation I thought that was >>>> /more/ descriptive ... >>>> >>>> otherwise libcamera-hal sounds like it's an abstraction layer of libcamera. >>>> >>>> If you prefer libcamera-hal I'll change it back. >>> >>> Following that logic, every shared object on a Linux system should be >>> called linux-* :-) Given that we may have different HAL implementations> in the same directory (both multiple camera HAL implementations in >>> Chrome OS, and multiple HALs for unrelated devices in Android), it's >>> important for the file name to specify the project and possibly the fact >>> that it's related to cameras. With 'libcamera' as the project name, both >>> goals are reached :-) >> >> Well ... maybe the Linux Abstraction Layer for Android could be called >> linux-hal (ok, too meta, because Android is on top of Linux) ... but the >> difference is the perspective. If this was installed on android then >> yes, I see your point - but we don't (currently) install on android, >> only chrome ;-) - where it is the 'android-hal' much like the 'libc' is >> the c library... > > FWIW I second naming the newly introduced .so as libcamera-hal.so. > > As an example Cros currently ships two HALs on Soraka, intel and usb. > Both implement the Android Camera3 API, why aren't they both called > android-hal.so ? Interestingly, On CrOS for IPU3 the intel hal builds a libcamera_hal.so which is renamed to intel-ipu3.so by the installation: chipset-kbl/media-libs/cros-camera-hal-intel-ipu3/cros-camera-hal-intel-ipu3-0.0.1-r617.ebuild cros-camera_dohal "${OUT}/lib/libcamera_hal.so" intel-ipu3.so and the chipset-rk3399 variant does the same thing: cros-camera_dohal "${OUT}/lib/libcamera_hal.so" rockchip-isp1.so Of course the catch is here, that our .so supports both, or all platforms ;-) > The HAL naming scheme usually reports the platform/camera manufacturer > (unless you know there will always be a single HAL on your systems, so > you can call it camera.so and that's it). Having 'libcamera' in the > name is important to make sure we won't conflict with other components > at install time, as they can claim to be the 'android-hal' of the > system as well. > > Not to mention Android has several HAL, one for each subsystem, so > this should at least be 'camera-hal.so' if we want to stay generic. > > Furthermore HAL is a pretty Android-specific thing, I don't think it No - I believe HAL means "Hardware Abstraction Library" It's a very common terminology, and I've encountered in in many places. > needs to have 'android' in the name to make clear what API we > implement. As it stands here, this library is a libcamera based implementation of the Android Camera HAL. If we had to implement other Camera API's on top of libcamera, perhaps imagine if we implemented a GenICam API ... - That is a Hardware Abstraction Layer too ... What would that be called? libcamera-genicam.so? Or would that also be handled in this same .so object? And (ok, pushing the boat out) but what if we ended up supporting windows, mac, or freebsd, fuchsia? Would the support for those be libcamera-hal.so or libcamera-mac-hal.so libcamera-windows-hal.so libcamera-freebsd-hal.so libcamera-fuchsia-hal.so (Wow, are OS's supposed to have 7 letters or something) >> I guess it could be the libcamera-android-hal.so too > > Repeating 'android' in the 'hal' name is of no use imho. > > libcamera-hal.so is a perfectly fine name for the libcamera-based camera > HAL. What are you afraid this can be confused with ? My concern is that 'HAL' does not say much. It means 'android' to you - but that's not a given. And maybe that's the point we're arguing. Perhaps libcamera-android.so would be acceptable? (If you're suggesting that it's the '-hal' suffix you don't think is needed) >> Perhaps if Chrome decided not to use the Android HAL but to use a >> wrapper on top of libcamera directly, I could imagine that could be >> called the libcamera-hal for instance. > > They would call into libcamera.so in that case, don't they ? I guess it depends on how they construct it. They might want a centralised wrapper component to call into to handle all the things like what chrome-specific hardware acceleration to apply on top... And perhaps that would be the libcamera-hal from their perspective. > What's > the purpose of an HAL if not to behave like an HAL? HAL is not just a > naming suffix, but a combination of the right exported symbols and the > right C-API that makes it possible for the library to be loaded at > run-time by the Android framework, and all of this is -very- Android > specific. I think we're talking across terms here. Yes, a HAL is an implementation of a set of exported symbols to provide an interface to talk to hardware. An *android camera HAL* is indeed that. But it's to implement the android camera hal specifically. A 'HAL' is ... just a generic term though, and it doesn't say "Which" API it is implementing. > Thanks > j > >> >> -- >> Kieran >> >> >>>>> ? >>>>> >>>>>> + android_hal_sources, >>>>>> + name_prefix : '', >>>>>> + link_with : android_camera_metadata, >>>>>> + install : true, >>>>>> + cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, >>>>>> + include_directories : android_includes, >>>>>> + dependencies : android_deps) >>>>> >>>>> Without install_dir, this will get installed in /usr/lib/, which isn't >>>>> where the CrOS camera service will look for it. We probably need a >>>>> configuration option to set the path, as it will differ between CrOS and >>>>> Android. >>>> >>>> But I have install_dir ... uhm ... Ok so I forgot to save out the >>>> updated patch before sending ... >>>> >>>> It's there in the next version already ;-) ... >>>> >>>>> +android_installdir = get_option('libdir') >>>>> + >>>>> if get_option('android_platform') == 'cros' >>>>> libcamera_cpp_args += [ '-DOS_CHROMEOS'] >>> >>> Extra space. >>> >>>>> + android_installdir = get_option('libdir') / 'camera_hal' >>>>> endif >>>> >>>> Will install it to camera_hal directly when the platform is set. >>> >>> Should install be set to true on CrOS only ? On Android meson isn't used >>> anyway, and on other systems, the Android HAL isn't needed. >> >> If it isn't needed, then don't build it (i.e. don't enable android)? >> >> And if it doesn't need to be installed (i.e. just compile testing) well >> then there's no need to call the install ... >> >> >> >>>>>> diff --git a/src/libcamera/meson.build b/src/libcamera/meson.build >>>>>> index e0a48aa23ea5..f77b80b878d8 100644 >>>>>> --- a/src/libcamera/meson.build >>>>>> +++ b/src/libcamera/meson.build >>>>>> @@ -129,16 +129,6 @@ libcamera_deps = [ >>>>>> dependency('threads'), >>>>>> ] >>>>>> >>>>>> -libcamera_link_with = [] >>>>>> - >>>>>> -if android_enabled >>>>>> - libcamera_sources += android_hal_sources >>>>>> - includes += android_includes >>>>>> - libcamera_link_with += android_camera_metadata >>>>>> - >>>>>> - libcamera_deps += android_deps >>>>>> -endif >>>>>> - >>>>>> # We add '/' to the build_rpath as a 'safe' path to act as a boolean flag. >>>>>> # The build_rpath is stripped at install time by meson, so we determine at >>>>>> # runtime if the library is running from an installed location by checking >>>>>> @@ -147,7 +137,6 @@ endif >>>>>> libcamera = shared_library('camera', >>>>>> libcamera_sources, >>>>>> install : true, >>>>>> - link_with : libcamera_link_with, >>>>>> cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, >>>>>> include_directories : includes, >>>>>> objects : libcamera_objects, >>>>>> diff --git a/src/meson.build b/src/meson.build >>>>>> index 64d22b9ce5b6..9dc32751bbb1 100644 >>>>>> --- a/src/meson.build >>>>>> +++ b/src/meson.build >>>>>> @@ -31,11 +31,10 @@ endif >>>>>> libcamera_cpp_args = [] >>>>>> libcamera_objects = [] >>>>>> >>>>>> -# The 'android' subdir must be processed first, and the build targets >>>>>> -# are included directly into the libcamera library when this is enabled. >>>>>> -subdir('android') >>>>>> - >>>>>> +# libcamera must be built first as a dependency to the other components. >>>>>> subdir('libcamera') >>>>> >>>>> This is really nice, having android first has been bugging me for a >>>>> while. >>>> >>>> Me to, I somehow assumed last time I looked at this that there were >>>> deeper reasons for integrating into the libcamera.so - but there wasn't >>>> anything preventing the split really. >>>> >>>> Anyway, v2 to come anyway with the correct install paths, and if desired >>>> - a rename. >>>> >>>>>> + >>>>>> +subdir('android') >>>>>> subdir('ipa') >>>>>> >>>>>> subdir('lc-compliance') >>> >> >> -- >> Regards >> -- >> Kieran >> _______________________________________________ >> libcamera-devel mailing list >> libcamera-devel@lists.libcamera.org >> https://lists.libcamera.org/listinfo/libcamera-devel
Hi Kieran, On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 01:25:23PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: > On 03/05/2021 09:29, Jacopo Mondi wrote: > > On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 09:13:31AM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: > >> On 03/05/2021 08:58, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >>> On Sun, May 02, 2021 at 09:02:45PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: > >>>> On 01/05/2021 21:54, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >>>>> On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 04:02:19PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: > >>>>>> The libcamera Android HAL implementation should not be an integral part > >>>>>> of libcamera, but a support library that utilises the libcamera public > >>>>>> API. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Move the implementation to it's own distinct library. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com> > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Please note that this no longer requires ChromeOS to manually symlink > >>>>>> into the camera_hal directory. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> A modification similar to the following should be applied to the Chrome > >>>>>> ebuilds if this is applied: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> diff --git a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild > >>>>>> index 433357f1ef74..cf90e438cfb3 100644 > >>>>>> --- a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild > >>>>>> +++ b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild > >>>>>> @@ -57,6 +57,4 @@ src_compile() { > >>>>>> > >>>>>> src_install() { > >>>>>> meson_src_install > >>>>>> - > >>>>>> - dosym ../libcamera.so "/usr/$(get_libdir)/camera_hal/libcamera.so" > >>>>>> } > >>>>> > >>>>> Could you submit a patch to CrOS ? > >>>>> > >>>>>> src/android/meson.build | 10 ++++++++++ > >>>>>> src/libcamera/meson.build | 11 ----------- > >>>>>> src/meson.build | 7 +++---- > >>>>>> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> diff --git a/src/android/meson.build b/src/android/meson.build > >>>>>> index 2be20c97e118..6170448a73ce 100644 > >>>>>> --- a/src/android/meson.build > >>>>>> +++ b/src/android/meson.build > >>>>>> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ > >>>>>> android_deps = [ > >>>>>> dependency('libexif', required : get_option('android')), > >>>>>> dependency('libjpeg', required : get_option('android')), > >>>>>> + libcamera_dep, > >>>>>> ] > >>>>>> > >>>>>> android_enabled = true > >>>>>> @@ -66,3 +67,12 @@ android_camera_metadata = static_library('camera_metadata', > >>>>>> android_camera_metadata_sources, > >>>>>> c_args : '-Wno-shadow', > >>>>>> include_directories : android_includes) > >>>>>> + > >>>>>> +android_hal = shared_library('android-hal', > >>>>> > >>>>> android-hal.so won't be a very descriptive name. Maybe libcamera-hal.so > >>>> > >>>> I started out with libcamera-hal, but then I decided I didn't like it so > >>>> I updated to android-hal ... > >>>> > >>>> Given that this is an android-hal implementation I thought that was > >>>> /more/ descriptive ... > >>>> > >>>> otherwise libcamera-hal sounds like it's an abstraction layer of libcamera. > >>>> > >>>> If you prefer libcamera-hal I'll change it back. > >>> > >>> Following that logic, every shared object on a Linux system should be > >>> called linux-* :-) Given that we may have different HAL implementations> in the same directory (both multiple camera HAL implementations in > >>> Chrome OS, and multiple HALs for unrelated devices in Android), it's > >>> important for the file name to specify the project and possibly the fact > >>> that it's related to cameras. With 'libcamera' as the project name, both > >>> goals are reached :-) > >> > >> Well ... maybe the Linux Abstraction Layer for Android could be called > >> linux-hal (ok, too meta, because Android is on top of Linux) ... but the > >> difference is the perspective. If this was installed on android then > >> yes, I see your point - but we don't (currently) install on android, > >> only chrome ;-) - where it is the 'android-hal' much like the 'libc' is > >> the c library... > > > > FWIW I second naming the newly introduced .so as libcamera-hal.so. > > > > As an example Cros currently ships two HALs on Soraka, intel and usb. > > Both implement the Android Camera3 API, why aren't they both called > > android-hal.so ? > > Interestingly, On CrOS for IPU3 the intel hal builds a libcamera_hal.so > which is renamed to intel-ipu3.so by the installation: > > chipset-kbl/media-libs/cros-camera-hal-intel-ipu3/cros-camera-hal-intel-ipu3-0.0.1-r617.ebuild > cros-camera_dohal "${OUT}/lib/libcamera_hal.so" intel-ipu3.so > > and the chipset-rk3399 variant does the same thing: > > cros-camera_dohal "${OUT}/lib/libcamera_hal.so" rockchip-isp1.so > > Of course the catch is here, that our .so supports both, or all > platforms ;-) This gives us the luxury of naming the binary in any way we want, and renaming it to match the Chrome OS naming scheme at install time in the ebuild. We can thus decouple the two discussions, please let's note that the HAL implementation doesn't really exist in isolation, it's only used for Chrome OS and Android devices, so we don't have to name it in a way that would take into account how they would be installed in other systems. The name we're picking will not be seen by anyone. > > The HAL naming scheme usually reports the platform/camera manufacturer > > (unless you know there will always be a single HAL on your systems, so > > you can call it camera.so and that's it). Having 'libcamera' in the > > name is important to make sure we won't conflict with other components > > at install time, as they can claim to be the 'android-hal' of the > > system as well. > > > > Not to mention Android has several HAL, one for each subsystem, so > > this should at least be 'camera-hal.so' if we want to stay generic. > > > > Furthermore HAL is a pretty Android-specific thing, I don't think it > > No - I believe HAL means "Hardware Abstraction Library" It's a very > common terminology, and I've encountered in in many places. In theory, I agree, but in the context of cameras, it's very linked to Android in practice. > > needs to have 'android' in the name to make clear what API we > > implement. > > As it stands here, this library is a libcamera based implementation of > the Android Camera HAL. > > If we had to implement other Camera API's on top of libcamera, perhaps > imagine if we implemented a GenICam API ... - That is a Hardware > Abstraction Layer too ... > > What would that be called? > > libcamera-genicam.so? Sounds good, or any another name that would be mandated by GenICam. > Or would that also be handled in this same .so object? > > And (ok, pushing the boat out) but what if we ended up supporting > windows, mac, or freebsd, fuchsia? > Would the support for those be > libcamera-hal.so > or > libcamera-mac-hal.so > libcamera-windows-hal.so > libcamera-freebsd-hal.so > libcamera-fuchsia-hal.so We would name those based on the requirements of these platforms. I doubt you'd have a .so on windows ;-) > (Wow, are OS's supposed to have 7 letters or something) > > >> I guess it could be the libcamera-android-hal.so too > > > > Repeating 'android' in the 'hal' name is of no use imho. > > > > libcamera-hal.so is a perfectly fine name for the libcamera-based camera > > HAL. What are you afraid this can be confused with ? > > My concern is that 'HAL' does not say much. It means 'android' to you - > but that's not a given. > > And maybe that's the point we're arguing. Perhaps > > libcamera-android.so > > would be acceptable? > > (If you're suggesting that it's the '-hal' suffix you don't think is needed) > > >> Perhaps if Chrome decided not to use the Android HAL but to use a > >> wrapper on top of libcamera directly, I could imagine that could be > >> called the libcamera-hal for instance. > > > > They would call into libcamera.so in that case, don't they ? > > I guess it depends on how they construct it. They might want a > centralised wrapper component to call into to handle all the things like > what chrome-specific hardware acceleration to apply on top... > > And perhaps that would be the libcamera-hal from their perspective. > > > What's > > the purpose of an HAL if not to behave like an HAL? HAL is not just a > > naming suffix, but a combination of the right exported symbols and the > > right C-API that makes it possible for the library to be loaded at > > run-time by the Android framework, and all of this is -very- Android > > specific. > > I think we're talking across terms here. Yes, a HAL is an implementation > of a set of exported symbols to provide an interface to talk to hardware. > > An *android camera HAL* is indeed that. But it's to implement the > android camera hal specifically. > > A 'HAL' is ... just a generic term though, and it doesn't say "Which" > API it is implementing. > > >>>>> ? > >>>>> > >>>>>> + android_hal_sources, > >>>>>> + name_prefix : '', > >>>>>> + link_with : android_camera_metadata, > >>>>>> + install : true, > >>>>>> + cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, > >>>>>> + include_directories : android_includes, > >>>>>> + dependencies : android_deps) > >>>>> > >>>>> Without install_dir, this will get installed in /usr/lib/, which isn't > >>>>> where the CrOS camera service will look for it. We probably need a > >>>>> configuration option to set the path, as it will differ between CrOS and > >>>>> Android. > >>>> > >>>> But I have install_dir ... uhm ... Ok so I forgot to save out the > >>>> updated patch before sending ... > >>>> > >>>> It's there in the next version already ;-) ... > >>>> > >>>>> +android_installdir = get_option('libdir') > >>>>> + > >>>>> if get_option('android_platform') == 'cros' > >>>>> libcamera_cpp_args += [ '-DOS_CHROMEOS'] > >>> > >>> Extra space. > >>> > >>>>> + android_installdir = get_option('libdir') / 'camera_hal' > >>>>> endif > >>>> > >>>> Will install it to camera_hal directly when the platform is set. > >>> > >>> Should install be set to true on CrOS only ? On Android meson isn't used > >>> anyway, and on other systems, the Android HAL isn't needed. > >> > >> If it isn't needed, then don't build it (i.e. don't enable android)? > >> > >> And if it doesn't need to be installed (i.e. just compile testing) well > >> then there's no need to call the install ... > >> > >>>>>> diff --git a/src/libcamera/meson.build b/src/libcamera/meson.build > >>>>>> index e0a48aa23ea5..f77b80b878d8 100644 > >>>>>> --- a/src/libcamera/meson.build > >>>>>> +++ b/src/libcamera/meson.build > >>>>>> @@ -129,16 +129,6 @@ libcamera_deps = [ > >>>>>> dependency('threads'), > >>>>>> ] > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -libcamera_link_with = [] > >>>>>> - > >>>>>> -if android_enabled > >>>>>> - libcamera_sources += android_hal_sources > >>>>>> - includes += android_includes > >>>>>> - libcamera_link_with += android_camera_metadata > >>>>>> - > >>>>>> - libcamera_deps += android_deps > >>>>>> -endif > >>>>>> - > >>>>>> # We add '/' to the build_rpath as a 'safe' path to act as a boolean flag. > >>>>>> # The build_rpath is stripped at install time by meson, so we determine at > >>>>>> # runtime if the library is running from an installed location by checking > >>>>>> @@ -147,7 +137,6 @@ endif > >>>>>> libcamera = shared_library('camera', > >>>>>> libcamera_sources, > >>>>>> install : true, > >>>>>> - link_with : libcamera_link_with, > >>>>>> cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, > >>>>>> include_directories : includes, > >>>>>> objects : libcamera_objects, > >>>>>> diff --git a/src/meson.build b/src/meson.build > >>>>>> index 64d22b9ce5b6..9dc32751bbb1 100644 > >>>>>> --- a/src/meson.build > >>>>>> +++ b/src/meson.build > >>>>>> @@ -31,11 +31,10 @@ endif > >>>>>> libcamera_cpp_args = [] > >>>>>> libcamera_objects = [] > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -# The 'android' subdir must be processed first, and the build targets > >>>>>> -# are included directly into the libcamera library when this is enabled. > >>>>>> -subdir('android') > >>>>>> - > >>>>>> +# libcamera must be built first as a dependency to the other components. > >>>>>> subdir('libcamera') > >>>>> > >>>>> This is really nice, having android first has been bugging me for a > >>>>> while. > >>>> > >>>> Me to, I somehow assumed last time I looked at this that there were > >>>> deeper reasons for integrating into the libcamera.so - but there wasn't > >>>> anything preventing the split really. > >>>> > >>>> Anyway, v2 to come anyway with the correct install paths, and if desired > >>>> - a rename. > >>>> > >>>>>> + > >>>>>> +subdir('android') > >>>>>> subdir('ipa') > >>>>>> > >>>>>> subdir('lc-compliance')
diff --git a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild index 433357f1ef74..cf90e438cfb3 100644 --- a/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild +++ b/media-libs/libcamera/libcamera-9999.ebuild @@ -57,6 +57,4 @@ src_compile() { src_install() { meson_src_install - - dosym ../libcamera.so "/usr/$(get_libdir)/camera_hal/libcamera.so" } src/android/meson.build | 10 ++++++++++ src/libcamera/meson.build | 11 ----------- src/meson.build | 7 +++---- 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/android/meson.build b/src/android/meson.build index 2be20c97e118..6170448a73ce 100644 --- a/src/android/meson.build +++ b/src/android/meson.build @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ android_deps = [ dependency('libexif', required : get_option('android')), dependency('libjpeg', required : get_option('android')), + libcamera_dep, ] android_enabled = true @@ -66,3 +67,12 @@ android_camera_metadata = static_library('camera_metadata', android_camera_metadata_sources, c_args : '-Wno-shadow', include_directories : android_includes) + +android_hal = shared_library('android-hal', + android_hal_sources, + name_prefix : '', + link_with : android_camera_metadata, + install : true, + cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, + include_directories : android_includes, + dependencies : android_deps) diff --git a/src/libcamera/meson.build b/src/libcamera/meson.build index e0a48aa23ea5..f77b80b878d8 100644 --- a/src/libcamera/meson.build +++ b/src/libcamera/meson.build @@ -129,16 +129,6 @@ libcamera_deps = [ dependency('threads'), ] -libcamera_link_with = [] - -if android_enabled - libcamera_sources += android_hal_sources - includes += android_includes - libcamera_link_with += android_camera_metadata - - libcamera_deps += android_deps -endif - # We add '/' to the build_rpath as a 'safe' path to act as a boolean flag. # The build_rpath is stripped at install time by meson, so we determine at # runtime if the library is running from an installed location by checking @@ -147,7 +137,6 @@ endif libcamera = shared_library('camera', libcamera_sources, install : true, - link_with : libcamera_link_with, cpp_args : libcamera_cpp_args, include_directories : includes, objects : libcamera_objects, diff --git a/src/meson.build b/src/meson.build index 64d22b9ce5b6..9dc32751bbb1 100644 --- a/src/meson.build +++ b/src/meson.build @@ -31,11 +31,10 @@ endif libcamera_cpp_args = [] libcamera_objects = [] -# The 'android' subdir must be processed first, and the build targets -# are included directly into the libcamera library when this is enabled. -subdir('android') - +# libcamera must be built first as a dependency to the other components. subdir('libcamera') + +subdir('android') subdir('ipa') subdir('lc-compliance')
The libcamera Android HAL implementation should not be an integral part of libcamera, but a support library that utilises the libcamera public API. Move the implementation to it's own distinct library. Signed-off-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com> --- Please note that this no longer requires ChromeOS to manually symlink into the camera_hal directory. A modification similar to the following should be applied to the Chrome ebuilds if this is applied: