On 23 December 2011 10:07, Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovet...@gmx.de> wrote: > On Fri, 23 Dec 2011, javier Martin wrote: > >> Hi Guennadi, >> thank you for your comments. >> >> On 23 December 2011 00:17, Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovet...@gmx.de> >> wrote: >> > On Thu, 22 Dec 2011, Javier Martin wrote: >> > >> >> To properly detect frame loss the driver must keep >> >> track of a frame_count. >> >> >> >> Furthermore, field_count use was erroneous because >> >> in progressive format this must be incremented twice. >> > >> > Hm, sorry, why this? I just looked at vivi.c - the version before >> > videobuf2 conversion - and it seems to only increment the count by one. >> >> If you look at the videobuf-core code you'll notice that the value >> assigned to v4l2_buf sequence field is (field_count >> 1): > > Right, i.e., field-count / 2. So, it really only counts _frames_, not > fields, doesn't it? >
Yes, v4l2_buf sequence field counts _frames_ but field_count counts _fields_, that's why I increment field-count twice in my driver. -- Javier Martin Vista Silicon S.L. CDTUC - FASE C - Oficina S-345 Avda de los Castros s/n 39005- Santander. Cantabria. Spain +34 942 25 32 60 www.vista-silicon.com -- 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
