[libcamera-devel] [PATCH 1/2] android: Make FRAME_DURATION key available in static metadata
paul.elder at ideasonboard.com
paul.elder at ideasonboard.com
Wed Jun 2 08:32:06 CEST 2021
Hi Hiro,
On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 02:01:24PM +0900, Hirokazu Honda wrote:
> Hi Paul, thank you for the patch.
>
> On Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 12:32 PM <paul.elder at ideasonboard.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 12:30:21PM +0900, paul.elder at ideasonboard.com
> wrote:
> > Hi Umang,
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 04:54:55PM +0530, Umang Jain wrote:
> > > Report ANDROID_SENSOR_FRAME_DURATION as an available key for CTS to
> >
> > s/available key/available result key/
> >
> > It's also a valid request key, and this patch doesn't add that, so I
> > think it should be specified (also in the subject).
>
> By "specified" I mean that "result" should be specified.
>
> As for the subject, s/key/result key/
>
>
> Paul
>
> >
> > > read out the value of frame duration we set in
> CameraDevice::getResultMetadata().
> > > Failing to do so might fail the CTS test:
> > > - android.hardware.camera2.cts.CaptureRequestTest#
> testNoiseReductionModeControl
> > >
> > > Fixes: 3beb1accac1d ("android: camera_device: Fix sensor frame
> duration")
> > > Signed-off-by: Umang Jain <umang.jain at ideasonboard.com>
>
>
> First, this code adds the missing request result key. So
> Reviewed-by: Hirokazu Honda <hiroh at chromium.org>
>
> However, although this is not necessarily related to this change, I wonder if
> those available keys should be there if and only if an entry with the key is
> actually added.
I think you're right. We might need to rethink where the keys and values
come from :/
I guess if we declare that we support some key then the application
can expect that it's always present.
> Could you run android.hardware.camera2.cts.CaptureResultTest while some entry
> is dropped and the entry is in available keys?
android.hardware.camera2.cts.CaptureRequestTest#testNoiseReductionModeControl
fails complaining that the key that it expects to be present is not. The
other tests don't seem to care.
Paul
>
> > > ---
> > > src/android/camera_device.cpp | 1 +
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/src/android/camera_device.cpp b/src/android/
> camera_device.cpp
> > > index fddc07ff..fe332ec3 100644
> > > --- a/src/android/camera_device.cpp
> > > +++ b/src/android/camera_device.cpp
> > > @@ -1422,6 +1422,7 @@ const camera_metadata_t
> *CameraDevice::getStaticMetadata()
> > > ANDROID_REQUEST_PIPELINE_DEPTH,
> > > ANDROID_SCALER_CROP_REGION,
> > > ANDROID_SENSOR_EXPOSURE_TIME,
> > > + ANDROID_SENSOR_FRAME_DURATION,
> > > ANDROID_SENSOR_ROLLING_SHUTTER_SKEW,
> > > ANDROID_SENSOR_TEST_PATTERN_MODE,
> > > ANDROID_SENSOR_TIMESTAMP,
> > > --
> > > 2.31.1
> > >
>
More information about the libcamera-devel
mailing list