From patchwork Fri Aug 8 04:04:53 2025 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Umang Jain X-Patchwork-Id: 24070 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 212BCBDCC1 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2025 04:04:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lancelot.ideasonboard.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lancelot.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50D2F6921E; Fri, 8 Aug 2025 06:04:48 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: lancelot.ideasonboard.com; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=igalia.com header.i=@igalia.com header.b="BwwKhxp0"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from fanzine2.igalia.com (fanzine2.igalia.com [213.97.179.56]) by lancelot.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0FB361460 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2025 06:04:45 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=igalia.com; s=20170329; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:Subject: Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=GC9Zpwz4wZffYL7DKvQ9v07PQqtL4KV8/SM1n+XRTyA=; b=BwwKhxp0ixyBHojCefp4WG8NZH IPMPn3r2B3jlqH1jSrH1rQN+jLAiIMyYPMLTRyE3ME8e5vX+ss4i9cz0TkJhgJWTYw4PHKd+Xx8rN 0sZD0ml5mMDb+yRmsiOvLRNC/wt1Q7MCyg7ZqO7EV+WSn34VDeTTMnZqma+WuDLecWpROapBsLwbN RLn5dGe+b6djsLOpM/443+30FqjnSV52VuUMr4NjXlz4e5tF6H+XC/BxUWkqz8WiuYo4BSfBEdqM4 XOZFODBm9CPUinZXO1RGt3b6p4cpRT2NXttOw4GHVs45OCLYgOuZpyyw9DFb8Kq/dgJ2oKlKXgUKm jvzA3UVw==; Received: from [49.36.71.143] (helo=uajain) by fanzine2.igalia.com with esmtpsa (Cipher TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim) id 1ukELT-00BKsn-FE; Fri, 08 Aug 2025 06:04:44 +0200 From: Umang Jain To: libcamera-devel@lists.libcamera.org Cc: Umang Jain Subject: [PATCH] libcamera: request: Clarify ReuseBuffers flag usage with fences Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2025 09:34:53 +0530 Message-ID: <20250808040453.9016-1-uajain@igalia.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.50.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 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" Explicitly clarify the usage of Request::ReuseBuffers flag in context of buffer fences. Fences are user-supplied and are not re-cycled as part of Request::reuse(), hence document this behaviour explicitly. Signed-off-by: Umang Jain Reviewed-by: Kieran Bingham --- src/libcamera/request.cpp | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/libcamera/request.cpp b/src/libcamera/request.cpp index 7f1e11e8..86d849ac 100644 --- a/src/libcamera/request.cpp +++ b/src/libcamera/request.cpp @@ -326,7 +326,8 @@ void Request::Private::timeout() * \var Request::Default * Don't reuse buffers * \var Request::ReuseBuffers - * Reuse the buffers that were previously added by addBuffer() + * Reuse the buffers that were previously added by addBuffer(). + * Buffers meant to be queued with a Fence, should not use this flag. */ /**