On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Vladimir Pantelic <vlado...@gmail.com> wrote: > Luca Barbato wrote: >> So shall we support both? > > both what? For now what we have is support for a dsp framework > using TI's "dspbridge" which is also the name used in the kernel.
tidspbridge is not TI's, it's ours (the FOSS community), it has 'ti' in it because it's for TI-specific hardware. > So all we are asking is to call it "tidspbridge" or "dspbridge" > in libav because there is another framework still in use called > dsplink *and* there are DSPs in future TI chips that will use > whatever frameworks and that we can then name "tidspwhatever" In the future TI would be using remoteproc; there's nothing else. remoteproc is not specific to TI, nor DSP's, yet, it would work with TI's DSPs. Problem solved. Cheers. -- Felipe Contreras _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list libav-devel@libav.org https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
