[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > After looking at and working with Xv, v4l and v4l2 I became somewhat > dissatisfied with the current state of affairs. I have attached a > description of the API that would make (at least) me much happier. > > I would very much appreciate comments from interested people.. > > thanks ! > > Vladimir Dergachev > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Kernel multimedia architecture > > ** the latest version can be obtained from ** > > http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/gatos/km/km.rfc.txt > > 0) Motivation > v4l, v4l2 and Xv are all suffering from the same problem: attempt to fit > existing multimedia devices into a fixed scheme. The use of pre-defined > structs to describe parameters of device is inherently wrong because > these parameters vary widely. This leads to either bloating of the control > structures with parameters used only by few devices, proliferation of > device-specific ioctl and/or struct versioning. This also makes it increasingly > hard to implement support for new parameters. > > The solution, IMO, is to move away from hard-coded models of multimedia > devices and instead allow greater flexibility to driver developers by > providing _symbolic_ interface.
... I don't know - I don't see anything in the interface design that can do anything more than v4l2. In fact, for high speed capturing I can see a number of possible catches. I would like to see a detailed explanation of how the capabilities differ from those of v4l2. (I also doubt that an interface this complex would ever make it into the kernel.) -justin _______________________________________________ Video4linux-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/video4linux-list
