[libcamera-devel] [PATCH v3 5/5] libcamera: camera_manager: Enforce unique camera names

[Jacopo Mondi]

Hi Niklas,

On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 01:42:25AM +0200, Niklas Söderlund wrote:
> The camera name have always been documented that it should be unique but
> it has never been enforced. Change this by refuse to add cameras to the

by refusing

> CameraManager that would create two cameras with the exact same name.
>
> Signed-off-by: Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund at ragnatech.se>
> ---
>  src/libcamera/camera_manager.cpp | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/libcamera/camera_manager.cpp b/src/libcamera/camera_manager.cpp
> index f60491d2c1a7500f..7d83263f1fabf5da 100644
> --- a/src/libcamera/camera_manager.cpp
> +++ b/src/libcamera/camera_manager.cpp
> @@ -178,10 +178,10 @@ void CameraManager::Private::addCamera(std::shared_ptr<Camera> camera,
>
>  	for (std::shared_ptr<Camera> c : cameras_) {
>  		if (c->name() == camera->name()) {
> -			LOG(Camera, Warning)
> -				<< "Registering camera with duplicate name '"
> +			LOG(Camera, Error)
> +				<< "Skip registering camera with duplicated name '"
>  				<< camera->name() << "'";
> -			break;
> +			return;

The error is not propagated up... not from here, not from the only
caller PipelineHandler::registerCamera.

I guess pipelines then do not have a way to know if registration was
successful or not. I don't think it's a big deal, they will notice
while developing that something is wrong if a camera does not show up,
an error code is not strictly needed.

Thanks
  j

>  		}
>  	}
>
> --
> 2.27.0
>
> _______________________________________________
> libcamera-devel mailing list
> libcamera-devel at lists.libcamera.org
> https://lists.libcamera.org/listinfo/libcamera-devel