On Tue, 5 Apr 2011, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 05, 2011 14:21:03 Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Friday 01 April 2011 10:13:02 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
[snip]
> > > * I O C T L C O D E S F O R V I D E O D E V I C E S
> > > *
> > > @@ -1937,6 +1957,10 @@ struct v4l2_dbg_chip_ident {
> > > #define VIDIOC_SUBSCRIBE_EVENT _IOW('V', 90, struct
> > > v4l2_event_subscription) #define VIDIOC_UNSUBSCRIBE_EVENT _IOW('V', 91,
> > > struct v4l2_event_subscription)
> > >
> > > +#define VIDIOC_CREATE_BUFS _IOWR('V', 92, struct
> > > v4l2_create_buffers)
> > > +#define VIDIOC_DESTROY_BUFS _IOWR('V', 93, struct v4l2_buffer_span)
> > > +#define VIDIOC_SUBMIT_BUF _IOW('V', 94, int)
> > > +
> >
> > In case we later need to pass other information (such as flags) to
> > VIDIOC_SUBMIT_BUF, you should use a structure instead of an int.
>
> I would just pass struct v4l2_buffer to this ioctl, just like QBUF/DQBUF do.
As I said, I didn't like this very much, because it involves redundant
data, but if we want to call .buf_prepare() from it, then we need
v4l2_buffer...
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 [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
