On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 19:03:12 +0200
Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
> On 10/04/2017 06:20 PM, wm4 wrote:
> >> Isn't this something that should be fixed in the driver?
> > yes but it might take forever and I dont know how many other drivers
> > might
> > need it.
> >
>
On 10/04/2017 06:20 PM, wm4 wrote:
Isn't this something that should be fixed in the driver?
yes but it might take forever and I dont know how many other drivers might
need it.
Why 2MB?
no analysis done but seems to be enough to hold an encoded frame. Should it be
any bigger?
I could use
On 10/04/2017 06:23 PM, Mark Thompson wrote:
On 04/10/17 16:48, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
On 10/04/2017 11:28 AM, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
On 10/04/2017 11:23 AM, wm4 wrote:
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 11:17:24 +0200
Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
Some V4L2 drivers fail to allocate buffers when size
On 04/10/17 16:48, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
> On 10/04/2017 11:28 AM, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
>> On 10/04/2017 11:23 AM, wm4 wrote:
>>> On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 11:17:24 +0200
>>> Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
>>>
Some V4L2 drivers fail to allocate buffers when sizeimage is not set
to a max
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 18:13:24 +0200
Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
> On 10/04/2017 05:59 PM, wm4 wrote:
> > diff --git a/libavcodec/v4l2_context.c b/libavcodec/v4l2_context.c
> > index 297792f..2707ef5 100644
> > --- a/libavcodec/v4l2_context.c
> > +++ b/libavcodec/v4l2_context.c
>
On 10/04/2017 05:59 PM, wm4 wrote:
diff --git a/libavcodec/v4l2_context.c b/libavcodec/v4l2_context.c
index 297792f..2707ef5 100644
--- a/libavcodec/v4l2_context.c
+++ b/libavcodec/v4l2_context.c
@@ -92,6 +92,8 @@ static inline int v4l2_type_supported(V4L2Context *ctx)
static inline void v4l
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 17:48:25 +0200
Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
> On 10/04/2017 11:28 AM, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
> > On 10/04/2017 11:23 AM, wm4 wrote:
> >> On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 11:17:24 +0200
> >> Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
> >>
> >>> Some V4L2 drivers fail to allocate buffers when sizeimag
On 10/04/2017 11:28 AM, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
On 10/04/2017 11:23 AM, wm4 wrote:
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 11:17:24 +0200
Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
Some V4L2 drivers fail to allocate buffers when sizeimage is not set
to a max value. This is indeed the case for sp5-mfc [1]
Most drivers should
On 10/04/2017 11:23 AM, wm4 wrote:
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 11:17:24 +0200
Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
Some V4L2 drivers fail to allocate buffers when sizeimage is not set
to a max value. This is indeed the case for sp5-mfc [1]
Most drivers should be able to calculate this value from the frame
dime
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 11:17:24 +0200
Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
> Some V4L2 drivers fail to allocate buffers when sizeimage is not set
> to a max value. This is indeed the case for sp5-mfc [1]
>
> Most drivers should be able to calculate this value from the frame
> dimensions and format - or at le
Some V4L2 drivers fail to allocate buffers when sizeimage is not set
to a max value. This is indeed the case for sp5-mfc [1]
Most drivers should be able to calculate this value from the frame
dimensions and format - or at least have their own default.
However since this work around should not imp
11 matches
Mail list logo
