On Fri, Jul 05, 2002 at 01:44:49PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ville Syrj�l� schrieb:
> > + if (++syncframe == data->vmbuf.frames)
> > + syncframe = 0;
> > + if (++capframe == data->vmbuf.frames)
> > + capframe = 0;
>
> Just an idea. Instead of two times doing this computation why not make
> this:
> syncframe = capframe;
> if (++syncframe == data->vmbuf.frames)
> syncframe = 0;
syncframe = capframe;
if (++capframe == data->vmbuf.frames)
capframe = 0;
Might work better :) But There is one possible benefit to the way I did
it. We could queue multiple frames. This might help with some load spikes.
At least the bttv driver has a module option to set the amount of buffers.
There would obviously be an increase in latency. Any ideas how to handle
this? Should we only queue up one buffer, all the buffers or let the user
decide? v4l doesn't allow changing the amount of buffers after the
module is loaded so the user request might fail. Maybe just print a
warning in that case an go on with the max amount of buffers.
--
Ville Syrj�l�
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.sci.fi/~syrjala/
--
Info: To unsubscribe send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe directfb-dev" as subject.
