Hi Matias, yes, this is more or less the way how v4l works. But v4l allows more flexibility. It is not restricted to cameras only. v4l allows handling different types of input and output devices such as cameras, monitors whatever. I'm only a bit familiar with camera input devices.
The question is if your suggested approach is working with cameras of any type? I would not opt for defining a completely new interface. Linux has this done in the past xx years. And the v4l API version 2 is the result that currently works quite well, I think. I think this is the way Nuttx should go, even with a less featured or just simpler interface. But this is just my personal opinion. Marco Am Sa., 3. Apr. 2021 um 13:40 Uhr schrieb Matias N. <mat...@imap.cc>: > My idea was to do something similar to the framebuffer device, using map > to access image data and ioctl's to control camera parameters and wait for > a frame. Is this mostly how v4l works? > Do you see a need for something more? Not sure what other aspects of video > handling require a specific solution. > > Best, > Matias >
