Alle 12:43, sabato 13 gennaio 2007, Vojtech Pavlik ha scritto:
> > Yes, and port all the applications to it. Not a small effort. Still the
> raw+library approach doesn't convince me entirely. ALSA has used it, and
> still a lot of people prefer the legacy /dev/dsp interface.

Consider that many applications are still based on the old V4L1.
In one way or the other they would have to be rewritten...

> Of course, some bridges (or standards) supply the video data in a stupid
> format with headers, which need to be removed to concatenate the
> individual chunks into a continuous picture. Then, most likely,
> zero-copy is not possible.

Exactly. One more reason why you can't map the ISOC transfer buffers directly 
is that
ISOC transfers does not garantuee a fixed number of video bytes per frame.

> But those that deliver the whole frame in a Bulk transfer without any
> interfering headers, it's trivially possible to avoid the copy. (Yes,
> I've done that. I needed it to be able to reach 60fps with a
> ovfx2/ov7620 camera. Not using V4L2 yet, though.)

Not all the USB controllers support bulk transfers. It's a second choice, when 
possible,
and, globally speaking, they are usually slower than the ISOC transfers.

Best regards
Luca Risolia
_______________________________________________
Linux-uvc-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/linux-uvc-devel

Reply via email to