Hi, >Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > >No idea whether this is a worthy and suitable topic for this meeting, but: > >V4L(2) video output vs. framebuffer. > >How about a v4l2-output - fbdev translation layer? You write a v4l2-output >driver and get a framebuffer device free of charge... TBH, I haven't given >this too much of a thought, but so far I don't see anything that would >make this impossible in principle. The video buffer management is quite >different between the two systems, but maybe we can teach video-output >drivers to work with just one buffer too? Anyway, feel free to tell me why >this is an absolutely impossible / impractical idea;) We also use v4l2-outputs for our display interfaces and for that we have v4l2-subdevices in a framebuffer driver. Although we have had no need for such a translation layer per se up to now, the idea seems interesting. I would definitely be interested in a general discussion about framebuffer driver - v4l2 output device interoperability though and can share our experience in this field. Best regards -- Pawel Osciak Linux Platform Group Samsung Poland R&D Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
