[libcamera-devel] [PATCH] pipeline: raspberrypi: Fix for staggered write on reset

[Naushir Patuck]

Hi David,

On Thu, 28 May 2020 at 17:06, David Plowman
<david.plowman at raspberrypi.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Naush
>
> Thanks for submitting this one!
>
> On Thu, 28 May 2020 at 15:56, Naushir Patuck <naush at raspberrypi.com> wrote:
>>
>> The reset function in staggered write was using the wrong index when
>> looking for the last updated camera parameters. This would cause
>> possibly stale exposure values to be written to the camera on a
>> mode switch for captures.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Naushir Patuck <naush at raspberrypi.com>
>> Signed-off-by: David Plowman <david.plowman at raspberrypi.com>
>> ---
>>  src/libcamera/pipeline/raspberrypi/staggered_ctrl.cpp | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/src/libcamera/pipeline/raspberrypi/staggered_ctrl.cpp b/src/libcamera/pipeline/raspberrypi/staggered_ctrl.cpp
>> index 391e13f5..b26fa63d 100644
>> --- a/src/libcamera/pipeline/raspberrypi/staggered_ctrl.cpp
>> +++ b/src/libcamera/pipeline/raspberrypi/staggered_ctrl.cpp
>> @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ void StaggeredCtrl::reset()
>>  {
>>         std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(lock_);
>>
>> -       int lastSetCount = std::max<int>(0, setCount_ - 1);
>> +       int lastSetCount = std::max<int>(0, setCount_);
>
>
> Actually I wonder whether we shouldn't just go with
>
>        uint32_t lastSetCount = setCount_;
>

Agreed, this is not needed any more.  New patch incoming.

Naush


> (the std::max seems a bit redundant now that we don't subtract 1).
>
>>
>>         std::unordered_map<uint32_t, int32_t> lastVal;
>>
>>         /* Reset the counters. */
>> --
>> 2.25.1
>>