Add OV9782 support, optional support for libcamera 0.6+, and add arm64 sysroot JNI build helper by SoZ0 · Pull Request #30 · PhotonVision/photon-libcamera-gl-driver

SoZ0 · 2026-02-06T11:10:59Z

Summary

This PR adds OV9782 support (C++ + Java), makes control-setting behave better across mono sensors and cameras that don’t expose certain controls, and includes a helper script for building/publishing an arm64 JNI against a sysroot (Docker by default). It also makes the libcamera>=0.6 requirement optional so we don’t break existing build environments.

What changed

Add OV9782 camera model support in C++ and Java.
Update model parsing (stringToModel) and treat OV7251 as grayscale.
Make CameraGrabber::setControls check what controls the camera actually supports before setting them; handle mono sensors more cleanly.
CMake: add REQUIRE_LIBCAMERA_0_6 (default OFF) to optionally enforce libcamera>=0.6.
Build: make libcamera_meme optional (BUILD_CAMERA_MEME) and add tools/build_arm64_jni.sh for sysroot-based arm64 JNI builds.
Docs + ignores: README updates and a couple .gitignore additions for local build/sysroot artifacts.

How to use

Enforce libcamera 0.6+ (only if you want it):

cmake -B cmake_build -S . -DREQUIRE_LIBCAMERA_0_6=ON

Arm64 sysroot JNI build:

SYSROOT_DIR=/path/to/target/rootfs \
  MAVEN_LOCAL_REPO=/path/to/m2 \
  tools/build_arm64_jni.sh

mcm001 · 2026-02-14T12:56:02Z

+# by default to avoid breaking existing environments.
+option(REQUIRE_LIBCAMERA_0_6 "Require libcamera >= 0.6 (enforced via pkg-config)" OFF)
+set(LIBCAMERA_MIN_VERSION "0.6" CACHE STRING "Minimum libcamera version when REQUIRE_LIBCAMERA_0_6 is ON")
+if (REQUIRE_LIBCAMERA_0_6)


I think for 2027+, we should force everyone to use a new libcamera?

Not sure what the over arching goals are, so I did not want to force 0.6 if there was other issues with other platforms. I would recommend it as 0.6+ is stable now to my knowledge

Hopefully this fixes (unofficial) Debian/RPiOS Trixie support again. I don't have the time to check this today, but maybe tomorrow.

Looks like we currently install libcamera 0.5.2 -> https://github.com/PhotonVision/photon-image-modifier/actions/runs/22130709321/job/64030036864?pr=126#step:5:1477

I think @Gold856 was partially through compiling libcamera from source as part of this driver build, which would release us from our dependence on random rpi apt repos.

The RPiOS Trixie image has libcamera 0.6 preinstalled. While libcamera 0.5 is available, sufficiently removing 0.6 to install 0.5 is nontrivial.

Yeah, I got libcamera 0.6 building completely independently. That's what I want to switch to for 2027. Still trying to work out how to ship the IPA files and stuff.

I tested this on Trixie using the main Photon branch (based on 26.3.2), and it fixed the CSI camera not showing up.

mcm001 · 2026-02-14T12:57:33Z

@@ -0,0 +1,134 @@
+#!/bin/bash


Can you remind me why we should upstream this script, rather than the existing cross build setup? (Which granted only really works in CI or a real Pi)

Makes local dev much quicker and possible without access to direct hardware. I can swap it out with a full docker container so other environments can build easier or if its not wanted can be removed all together.

I do think that the current cross-compiling story kinda sucks/isn't there, so I do see value in having a blessed way to build outside of the pipeline. I'll think a bit harder on it but that broadly makes sense to me

TBQH this is pretty opaque magic to me, but I don't mind upstreaming if you can help maintain

Are there functional differences between the docker and sysroot build methods, or are they redundant? Either way, they don't seem to share much in common, so putting them in separate scripts or functions might help them be more readable.

The sysroot and docker builds should be the same, the host sysroot methods was causing several issues cause it seems like it was not meant to run on anyone's host development systems. Many issues with the script making binds to my actual hardware and not properly cleaning itself up on failures correctly. The docker build was to make it less of headache not pollute the host system. Not sure if maybe its just some incompatibility issue with my Linux distro but it gives an isolated build environment that contains sysroot runs (with the single host dir exception).

But i can pull the dockerimage out the script and make it clearer if you want to keep the docker routine, else i can just keep it local and not push it upstream

thatcomputerguy0101 · 2026-04-10T19:11:36Z

+    const bool has_awb =
+        control_info.find(&controls::AwbEnable) != control_info.end();
+    const bool is_mono_sensor =
+        (m_model == OV7251) || (m_model == OV9281 && !has_awb);


This should probably use isGrayScale instead of a list of comparisons.

good point, I will make the change

thatcomputerguy0101 · 2026-04-10T19:12:09Z

+    if (!is_mono_sensor &&
+        control_info.find(&controls::ColourGains) != control_info.end()) {


Checking both the model and the controls here and in the rest of the if conditions feels strange, but I can't say if it is necessary or not. Is one or the other a better source of truth?

This was more to keep in line with the old behaviour and not to add controls that are not advertised by libcamera. But switching to a pure libcamera capability check is the way to go for sure.

thatcomputerguy0101 · 2026-04-10T19:17:41Z

@@ -0,0 +1,134 @@
+#!/bin/bash


Are there functional differences between the docker and sysroot build methods, or are they redundant? Either way, they don't seem to share much in common, so putting them in separate scripts or functions might help them be more readable.

SoZ0 · 2026-04-24T10:08:56Z

your comments should be addressed in this and I saw some of my changes made it in, so I merged with main to keep the branch up to date. I believe it should be good, lmk if anything needs fixing. I will also try to be much faster to respond then prior.

SoZ0 added 5 commits January 23, 2026 12:56

ov9782 support

8238d99

Update camera_model.cpp

7c85422

bump to libcamera 0.6

5f5c945

Update build_arm64_jni.sh

7374d46

Made libcamera 0.6 optional

29bfc81

mcm001 reviewed Feb 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

samfreund mentioned this pull request Apr 9, 2026

Upgrade to Trixie and Java 25, remove OrangePi 6 Plus image PhotonVision/photon-image-modifier#136

Merged

thatcomputerguy0101 reviewed Apr 10, 2026

View reviewed changes

thatcomputerguy0101 mentioned this pull request Apr 23, 2026

Update to libcamera 0.6 #32

Merged

SoZ0 added 2 commits April 24, 2026 02:50

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into ov9782

cfc7f2a

Address grabber controls and split arm64 docker build

3958ada

		if (!is_mono_sensor &&
		control_info.find(&controls::ColourGains) != control_info.end()) {

Conversation

SoZ0 commented Feb 6, 2026

Summary

What changed

How to use

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mcm001 Feb 14, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

SoZ0 commented Apr 24, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

mcm001 Feb 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading