Em Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:35:57 +0200
Hans Verkuil <hverk...@xs4all.nl> escreveu:

> On Thursday 17 September 2009 00:15:23 Andy Walls wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 23:34 +0200, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 16 September 2009 22:50:43 Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > > > Em Wed, 16 Sep 2009 21:21:16 +0200
> > 
> > > C) in all other cases you only get it if a kernel config option is on. 
> > > And since
> > > any advanced controls are still exposed in sysfs you can still change 
> > > those even
> > > if the config option was off.
> > 
> > That is a user interface and support annoyance.  Either decide to have a
> > node for a subdevice or don't.  If a distribution wants to supress them,
> > udev rules could suffice - right?  Changing udev rules is
> > (theoretically) easier than rebuilding the kernel for most end users.
> 
> Good point.

I suspect that, in practice, the drivers will talk for themselves: e. g.
drivers that are used with embedded and that requires extra parameters for
tweaking will add some callback methods to indicate V4L2 core that they need
a /dev. Others will not implement those methods and won't have any /dev
associated.

Cheers,
Mauro
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to