On Mon, 15 Nov 2010, Jun Nie wrote: > 2010/11/15 Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@xxxxxx>: > > On Mon, 15 Nov 2010, Jun Nie wrote: > > > >> 2010/11/8 Jun Nie <niej0001@xxxxxxxxx>: > >> > 2010/11/2 Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@xxxxxx>: > >> >> Hi Jun > >> >> > >> >> On Fri, 29 Oct 2010, Jun Nie wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> Hi Guennadi, > >> >>> I find that your idea of "provide a generic framebuffer driver > >> >>> that could sit on top of a v4l output driver", which may be a good > >> >>> solution of our LCD controller driver, or maybe much more other SOC > >> >>> LCD drivers. V4L2 interface support many features than framebuffer for > >> >>> video playback usage, such as buffer queue/dequeue, quality control, > >> >>> etc. However, framebuffer is common for UI display. Implement two > >> >>> drivers for one controller is a challenge for current architecture. > >> >>> I am interested in your idea. Could you elaborate it? Or do you > >> >>> think multifunction driver is the right solution for this the > >> >>> scenario? > >> >> > >> >> Right, we have discussed this idea at the V4L2/MC mini-summit earlier this > >> >> year, there the outcome was, that the idea is not bad, but it is easy > >> >> enough to create such framebuffer additions on top of specific v4l2 output > >> >> drivers anyway, so, noone was interested enough to start designing and > >> >> implementing such a generic wrapper driver. However, I've heard, that this > >> >> topic has also been scheduled for discussion at another v4l / kernel > >> >> meeting (plumbers?), so, someone might be looking into implementing > >> >> this... If you yourself would like to do that - feel free to propose a > >> >> design on both mailing lists (fbdev added to cc), then we can discuss it, > >> >> and you can implement it;) > >> >> > >> >> Thanks > >> >> Guennadi > >> >> --- > >> >> Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. > >> >> Freelance Open-Source Software Developer > >> >> http://www.open-technology.de/ > >> >> > >> > > >> > Good to know others are also interested in it. I surely can contribute > >> > to it. But my concern is how to support Xwindow. Android and Ubuntu > >> > should both run on our platform. Queue/deque should work well for > >> > Android UI. I still can not figure out how to support Xwindow, for it > >> > does not interact with driver after it get the mmaped buffer. > >> > > >> > Jun > >> > > >> > >> Guennadi, > >> > >> Any idea on supporting this feature with V4L2 based FB? I can not > >> figure out any method and will adopt framebuffer for UI and V4L2 for > >> video layer for the schedule pressure. > > > > Hi Jun > > > > Sorry, not sure I understand you right here. You are saying, that atm you > > don't have the time to work on a generic solution and are going for a > > specific one, right? Yes, that's what everybody is currently doing. And > > you're asking whether I am working or am going to work on such a generic > > solution? No, sorry, I don't think I'll have time for it either in the > > near future. > > > > Thanks > > Guennadi > > --- > > Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. > > Freelance Open-Source Software Developer > > http://www.open-technology.de/ > > > > > Hi Guennadi > I mean I have no idea on how to support Xwindow's requirement if FB > is based on V4L2. I can contribute on V4L2 based FB if it is clear. > But I will do as everbody does currently. Maybe you didn't understand the concept of this driver then. The shole idea is to have a v4l2 output driver as a base and add a framebuffer translation layer on the top. Which would provide two interfaces to the user: a v4l2 one with frame queuing etc, and a standard fb one, which should be usable by any fb application (X, directfb,...) natively. 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 majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
