Re: V4L2 and framebuffer for the same controller
2010/11/15 Guennadi Liakhovetski g.liakhovet...@gmx.de: On Mon, 15 Nov 2010, Jun Nie wrote: 2010/11/8 Jun Nie niej0...@gmail.com: 2010/11/2 Guennadi Liakhovetski g.liakhovet...@gmx.de: Hi Jun On Fri, 29 Oct 2010, Jun Nie wrote: Hi Guennadi, I find that your idea of provide a generic framebuffer driver that could sit on top of a v4l output driver, which may be a good solution of our LCD controller driver, or maybe much more other SOC LCD drivers. V4L2 interface support many features than framebuffer for video playback usage, such as buffer queue/dequeue, quality control, etc. However, framebuffer is common for UI display. Implement two drivers for one controller is a challenge for current architecture. I am interested in your idea. Could you elaborate it? Or do you think multifunction driver is the right solution for this the scenario? Right, we have discussed this idea at the V4L2/MC mini-summit earlier this year, there the outcome was, that the idea is not bad, but it is easy enough to create such framebuffer additions on top of specific v4l2 output drivers anyway, so, noone was interested enough to start designing and implementing such a generic wrapper driver. However, I've heard, that this topic has also been scheduled for discussion at another v4l / kernel meeting (plumbers?), so, someone might be looking into implementing this... If you yourself would like to do that - feel free to propose a design on both mailing lists (fbdev added to cc), then we can discuss it, and you can implement it;) Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/ Good to know others are also interested in it. I surely can contribute to it. But my concern is how to support Xwindow. Android and Ubuntu should both run on our platform. Queue/deque should work well for Android UI. I still can not figure out how to support Xwindow, for it does not interact with driver after it get the mmaped buffer. Jun Guennadi, Any idea on supporting this feature with V4L2 based FB? I can not figure out any method and will adopt framebuffer for UI and V4L2 for video layer for the schedule pressure. Hi Jun Sorry, not sure I understand you right here. You are saying, that atm you don't have the time to work on a generic solution and are going for a specific one, right? Yes, that's what everybody is currently doing. And you're asking whether I am working or am going to work on such a generic solution? No, sorry, I don't think I'll have time for it either in the near future. Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/ Hi Guennadi I mean I have no idea on how to support Xwindow's requirement if FB is based on V4L2. I can contribute on V4L2 based FB if it is clear. But I will do as everbody does currently. Jun -- 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
Re: V4L2 and framebuffer for the same controller
On Mon, 15 Nov 2010, Jun Nie wrote: 2010/11/15 Guennadi Liakhovetski g.liakhovet...@gmx.de: On Mon, 15 Nov 2010, Jun Nie wrote: 2010/11/8 Jun Nie niej0...@gmail.com: 2010/11/2 Guennadi Liakhovetski g.liakhovet...@gmx.de: Hi Jun On Fri, 29 Oct 2010, Jun Nie wrote: Hi Guennadi, I find that your idea of provide a generic framebuffer driver that could sit on top of a v4l output driver, which may be a good solution of our LCD controller driver, or maybe much more other SOC LCD drivers. V4L2 interface support many features than framebuffer for video playback usage, such as buffer queue/dequeue, quality control, etc. However, framebuffer is common for UI display. Implement two drivers for one controller is a challenge for current architecture. I am interested in your idea. Could you elaborate it? Or do you think multifunction driver is the right solution for this the scenario? Right, we have discussed this idea at the V4L2/MC mini-summit earlier this year, there the outcome was, that the idea is not bad, but it is easy enough to create such framebuffer additions on top of specific v4l2 output drivers anyway, so, noone was interested enough to start designing and implementing such a generic wrapper driver. However, I've heard, that this topic has also been scheduled for discussion at another v4l / kernel meeting (plumbers?), so, someone might be looking into implementing this... If you yourself would like to do that - feel free to propose a design on both mailing lists (fbdev added to cc), then we can discuss it, and you can implement it;) Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/ Good to know others are also interested in it. I surely can contribute to it. But my concern is how to support Xwindow. Android and Ubuntu should both run on our platform. Queue/deque should work well for Android UI. I still can not figure out how to support Xwindow, for it does not interact with driver after it get the mmaped buffer. Jun Guennadi, Any idea on supporting this feature with V4L2 based FB? I can not figure out any method and will adopt framebuffer for UI and V4L2 for video layer for the schedule pressure. Hi Jun Sorry, not sure I understand you right here. You are saying, that atm you don't have the time to work on a generic solution and are going for a specific one, right? Yes, that's what everybody is currently doing. And you're asking whether I am working or am going to work on such a generic solution? No, sorry, I don't think I'll have time for it either in the near future. Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/ Hi Guennadi I mean I have no idea on how to support Xwindow's requirement if FB is based on V4L2. I can contribute on V4L2 based FB if it is clear. But I will do as everbody does currently. Maybe you didn't understand the concept of this driver then. The shole idea is to have a v4l2 output driver as a base and add a framebuffer translation layer on the top. Which would provide two interfaces to the user: a v4l2 one with frame queuing etc, and a standard fb one, which should be usable by any fb application (X, directfb,...) natively. Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/ -- 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
Re: V4L2 and framebuffer for the same controller
2010/11/15 Guennadi Liakhovetski g.liakhovet...@gmx.de: On Mon, 15 Nov 2010, Jun Nie wrote: 2010/11/15 Guennadi Liakhovetski g.liakhovet...@gmx.de: On Mon, 15 Nov 2010, Jun Nie wrote: 2010/11/8 Jun Nie niej0...@gmail.com: 2010/11/2 Guennadi Liakhovetski g.liakhovet...@gmx.de: Hi Jun On Fri, 29 Oct 2010, Jun Nie wrote: Hi Guennadi, I find that your idea of provide a generic framebuffer driver that could sit on top of a v4l output driver, which may be a good solution of our LCD controller driver, or maybe much more other SOC LCD drivers. V4L2 interface support many features than framebuffer for video playback usage, such as buffer queue/dequeue, quality control, etc. However, framebuffer is common for UI display. Implement two drivers for one controller is a challenge for current architecture. I am interested in your idea. Could you elaborate it? Or do you think multifunction driver is the right solution for this the scenario? Right, we have discussed this idea at the V4L2/MC mini-summit earlier this year, there the outcome was, that the idea is not bad, but it is easy enough to create such framebuffer additions on top of specific v4l2 output drivers anyway, so, noone was interested enough to start designing and implementing such a generic wrapper driver. However, I've heard, that this topic has also been scheduled for discussion at another v4l / kernel meeting (plumbers?), so, someone might be looking into implementing this... If you yourself would like to do that - feel free to propose a design on both mailing lists (fbdev added to cc), then we can discuss it, and you can implement it;) Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/ Good to know others are also interested in it. I surely can contribute to it. But my concern is how to support Xwindow. Android and Ubuntu should both run on our platform. Queue/deque should work well for Android UI. I still can not figure out how to support Xwindow, for it does not interact with driver after it get the mmaped buffer. Jun Guennadi, Any idea on supporting this feature with V4L2 based FB? I can not figure out any method and will adopt framebuffer for UI and V4L2 for video layer for the schedule pressure. Hi Jun Sorry, not sure I understand you right here. You are saying, that atm you don't have the time to work on a generic solution and are going for a specific one, right? Yes, that's what everybody is currently doing. And you're asking whether I am working or am going to work on such a generic solution? No, sorry, I don't think I'll have time for it either in the near future. Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/ Hi Guennadi I mean I have no idea on how to support Xwindow's requirement if FB is based on V4L2. I can contribute on V4L2 based FB if it is clear. But I will do as everbody does currently. Maybe you didn't understand the concept of this driver then. The shole idea is to have a v4l2 output driver as a base and add a framebuffer translation layer on the top. Which would provide two interfaces to the user: a v4l2 one with frame queuing etc, and a standard fb one, which should be usable by any fb application (X, directfb,...) natively. Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/ You mean fb with V4L2 interface will manage memory with video-buf and standard fb interface still handle memory independently, ie. get memory with dma_alloc_writecombine directly? Thanks! Jun -- 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
Re: V4L2 and framebuffer for the same controller
2010/11/8 Jun Nie niej0...@gmail.com: 2010/11/2 Guennadi Liakhovetski g.liakhovet...@gmx.de: Hi Jun On Fri, 29 Oct 2010, Jun Nie wrote: Hi Guennadi, I find that your idea of provide a generic framebuffer driver that could sit on top of a v4l output driver, which may be a good solution of our LCD controller driver, or maybe much more other SOC LCD drivers. V4L2 interface support many features than framebuffer for video playback usage, such as buffer queue/dequeue, quality control, etc. However, framebuffer is common for UI display. Implement two drivers for one controller is a challenge for current architecture. I am interested in your idea. Could you elaborate it? Or do you think multifunction driver is the right solution for this the scenario? Right, we have discussed this idea at the V4L2/MC mini-summit earlier this year, there the outcome was, that the idea is not bad, but it is easy enough to create such framebuffer additions on top of specific v4l2 output drivers anyway, so, noone was interested enough to start designing and implementing such a generic wrapper driver. However, I've heard, that this topic has also been scheduled for discussion at another v4l / kernel meeting (plumbers?), so, someone might be looking into implementing this... If you yourself would like to do that - feel free to propose a design on both mailing lists (fbdev added to cc), then we can discuss it, and you can implement it;) Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/ Good to know others are also interested in it. I surely can contribute to it. But my concern is how to support Xwindow. Android and Ubuntu should both run on our platform. Queue/deque should work well for Android UI. I still can not figure out how to support Xwindow, for it does not interact with driver after it get the mmaped buffer. Jun Guennadi, Any idea on supporting this feature with V4L2 based FB? I can not figure out any method and will adopt framebuffer for UI and V4L2 for video layer for the schedule pressure. Jun -- 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
Re: V4L2 and framebuffer for the same controller
On Mon, 15 Nov 2010, Jun Nie wrote: 2010/11/8 Jun Nie niej0...@gmail.com: 2010/11/2 Guennadi Liakhovetski g.liakhovet...@gmx.de: Hi Jun On Fri, 29 Oct 2010, Jun Nie wrote: Hi Guennadi, I find that your idea of provide a generic framebuffer driver that could sit on top of a v4l output driver, which may be a good solution of our LCD controller driver, or maybe much more other SOC LCD drivers. V4L2 interface support many features than framebuffer for video playback usage, such as buffer queue/dequeue, quality control, etc. However, framebuffer is common for UI display. Implement two drivers for one controller is a challenge for current architecture. I am interested in your idea. Could you elaborate it? Or do you think multifunction driver is the right solution for this the scenario? Right, we have discussed this idea at the V4L2/MC mini-summit earlier this year, there the outcome was, that the idea is not bad, but it is easy enough to create such framebuffer additions on top of specific v4l2 output drivers anyway, so, noone was interested enough to start designing and implementing such a generic wrapper driver. However, I've heard, that this topic has also been scheduled for discussion at another v4l / kernel meeting (plumbers?), so, someone might be looking into implementing this... If you yourself would like to do that - feel free to propose a design on both mailing lists (fbdev added to cc), then we can discuss it, and you can implement it;) Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/ Good to know others are also interested in it. I surely can contribute to it. But my concern is how to support Xwindow. Android and Ubuntu should both run on our platform. Queue/deque should work well for Android UI. I still can not figure out how to support Xwindow, for it does not interact with driver after it get the mmaped buffer. Jun Guennadi, Any idea on supporting this feature with V4L2 based FB? I can not figure out any method and will adopt framebuffer for UI and V4L2 for video layer for the schedule pressure. Hi Jun Sorry, not sure I understand you right here. You are saying, that atm you don't have the time to work on a generic solution and are going for a specific one, right? Yes, that's what everybody is currently doing. And you're asking whether I am working or am going to work on such a generic solution? No, sorry, I don't think I'll have time for it either in the near future. Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/ -- 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
Re: V4L2 and framebuffer for the same controller
2010/11/2 Guennadi Liakhovetski g.liakhovet...@gmx.de: Hi Jun On Fri, 29 Oct 2010, Jun Nie wrote: Hi Guennadi, I find that your idea of provide a generic framebuffer driver that could sit on top of a v4l output driver, which may be a good solution of our LCD controller driver, or maybe much more other SOC LCD drivers. V4L2 interface support many features than framebuffer for video playback usage, such as buffer queue/dequeue, quality control, etc. However, framebuffer is common for UI display. Implement two drivers for one controller is a challenge for current architecture. I am interested in your idea. Could you elaborate it? Or do you think multifunction driver is the right solution for this the scenario? Right, we have discussed this idea at the V4L2/MC mini-summit earlier this year, there the outcome was, that the idea is not bad, but it is easy enough to create such framebuffer additions on top of specific v4l2 output drivers anyway, so, noone was interested enough to start designing and implementing such a generic wrapper driver. However, I've heard, that this topic has also been scheduled for discussion at another v4l / kernel meeting (plumbers?), so, someone might be looking into implementing this... If you yourself would like to do that - feel free to propose a design on both mailing lists (fbdev added to cc), then we can discuss it, and you can implement it;) Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/ Good to know others are also interested in it. I surely can contribute to it. But my concern is how to support Xwindow. Android and Ubuntu should both run on our platform. Queue/deque should work well for Android UI. I still can not figure out how to support Xwindow, for it does not interact with driver after it get the mmaped buffer. Jun -- 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
