Sorry Laurent, I originally posted this incorrectly. This is what I meant to post:
Laurent, Thank you to you and Nathanael for your responses. A couple of other questions. So then, it is the select mechanism that enforces the frame rate? By that I mean, in my application, if I use select/read, select will block until the video frame is completely captured by the driver. So, as long as my frame-by-frame processing latency is small enough, select will unblock according to the frame rate, thus it is the enforcer of the frame rate? I guess then, my Quickcam Pro 4000 must be based on a different chipset than the cameras the UVC driver supports. The reason I purchased the Quickcam Pro 4000 was that I thought there was a driver available for it, the PWC driver. I thought that was my only alternative under linux. However, my understand was that the developers had stopped moving forward on it so I suspected it was not fully supported. Consequently, I was not too surprised (although disappointed) to experience that some ioctls are not working correctly. It appears that there is another alternative. What is the general state of development of the UVC driver? Is it safe to assume that it is further along than the PWC driver? If that is the case, then I need to get a different camera, one that is supported by the UVC driver. If so, what UVC supported camera would you recommend? Which supports the widest frame sizes, frame rates, best quality, etc. Thanks again, -Andres _______________________________________________ Linux-uvc-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/linux-uvc-devel
