Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] media: platform: mediatek: isp_30: add mediatek ISP3.0 camsv
From: CK Hu (胡俊光)
Date: Tue Mar 19 2024 - 04:48:10 EST
Hi, Julien:
On Wed, 2024-01-10 at 15:14 +0100, Julien Stephan wrote:
>
> External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until
> you have verified the sender or the content.
> From: Phi-bang Nguyen <pnguyen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> This driver provides a path to bypass the SoC ISP so that image data
> coming from the SENINF can go directly into memory without any image
> processing. This allows the use of an external ISP.
>
> Signed-off-by: Phi-bang Nguyen <pnguyen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Florian Sylvestre <fsylvestre@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> [Paul Elder fix irq locking]
> Signed-off-by: Paul Elder <paul.elder@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Co-developed-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Co-developed-by: Julien Stephan <jstephan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Julien Stephan <jstephan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
[snip]
> +
> +#define IMG_MAX_WIDTH 5376
> +#define IMG_MAX_HEIGHT 4032
> +#define IMG_DEF_WIDTH 1920
> +#define IMG_DEF_HEIGHT 1080
Why do you define default width/height? Does 1920x1080 have any
benefit? If so, add comment to describe why choose 1920x1080. If no, I
think using IMG_MAX_WIDTH/IMG_MAX_HEIGHT as default is a good choice
because we could drop this redundant definition and let hardware work
in its best quality.
Regards,
CK
> +#define IMG_MIN_WIDTH 80
> +#define IMG_MIN_HEIGHT 60
> +