Hi Sakari,
On Friday 21 February 2014 15:04:48 Sakari Ailus wrote:
> Hi Laurent,
>
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 12:58:58PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> ...
>
> > > It's possible to calculate it (decrementing the readout time + exposure
> > > time from the end of frame timestamp) and that's what
Hi Laurent,
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 12:58:58PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
...
> > It's possible to calculate it (decrementing the readout time + exposure
> > time from the end of frame timestamp) and that's what the devices
> > supposedly do. The pre-frame exposure time isn't available to the
Hi Sakari,
On Friday 21 February 2014 11:31:38 Sakari Ailus wrote:
> Hans Verkuil wrote:
> > On 02/20/2014 08:41 PM, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> >> Some devices do not produce timestamps that correspond to the end of the
> >> frame. The user space should be informed on the matter. This patch
> >> achiev
Hi Sylwester,
Thanks for the comments.
Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
...
On 02/20/2014 09:36 PM, Hans Verkuil wrote:
On 02/20/2014 08:41 PM, Sakari Ailus wrote:
Some devices do not produce timestamps that correspond to the end of the
frame. The user space should be informed on the matter. This pa
Hi Hans,
Hans Verkuil wrote:
On 02/20/2014 08:41 PM, Sakari Ailus wrote:
Some devices do not produce timestamps that correspond to the end of the
frame. The user space should be informed on the matter. This patch achieves
that by adding buffer flags (and a mask) for timestamp sources since more
On 02/21/2014 12:30 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Hans,
>
> On Thursday 20 February 2014 21:36:51 Hans Verkuil wrote:
>> On 02/20/2014 08:41 PM, Sakari Ailus wrote:
>>> Some devices do not produce timestamps that correspond to the end of the
>>> frame. The user space should be informed on the m
Hi Hans,
On Thursday 20 February 2014 21:36:51 Hans Verkuil wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 08:41 PM, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > Some devices do not produce timestamps that correspond to the end of the
> > frame. The user space should be informed on the matter. This patch
> > achieves
> > that by adding buffe
On 02/20/2014 10:10 PM, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
I would actually be inclined to drop it altogether for this particular
timestamp source. But it's up to Laurent.
Yup, the "a small amount of time" concept seems a bit vague here.
It's not clear how long period it could be and the tolerance would
Hi Sakari,
On 02/20/2014 09:36 PM, Hans Verkuil wrote:
On 02/20/2014 08:41 PM, Sakari Ailus wrote:
Some devices do not produce timestamps that correspond to the end of the
frame. The user space should be informed on the matter. This patch achieves
that by adding buffer flags (and a mask) for ti
On 02/20/2014 08:41 PM, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> Some devices do not produce timestamps that correspond to the end of the
> frame. The user space should be informed on the matter. This patch achieves
> that by adding buffer flags (and a mask) for timestamp sources since more
> possible timestamping po
Some devices do not produce timestamps that correspond to the end of the
frame. The user space should be informed on the matter. This patch achieves
that by adding buffer flags (and a mask) for timestamp sources since more
possible timestamping points are expected than just two.
A three-bit mask i
11 matches
Mail list logo
