Hi Guennadi, On Wednesday 16 February 2011 14:49:51 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > On Wed, 16 Feb 2011, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Wednesday 16 February 2011 06:57:11 Bhupesh SHARMA wrote: > > > Hi Guennadi, > > > > > > As I mentioned in one of my previous mails , we are developing a Camera > > > Host and Sensor driver for our ST specific SoC and considering using > > > the soc-camera framework for the same. One of our open-source > > > customers has raised a interesting case though: > > > > > > It seems they have an existing solution (for another SoC) in which they > > > do not use V4L2 framework and instead use the Gstreamer with > > > framebuffer. They specifically wish us to implement a solution which > > > is compatible with ANDROID applications. > > > > > > Could you please help us in deciding which approach is preferable in > > > terms of performance, maintenance and ease-of-design. > > > > That's a difficult question that can't be answered without more details > > about your SoC. Could you share some documentation, such as a high-level > > block diagram of the video-related blocks in the SoC ? > > Laurent, IIUC, the choice above referred not to soc-camera vs. plain v4l2, > but to v4l2 vs. original android-style video character device, which > doesn't seem so difficult to me;) I assume that the Android video character device uses a proprietary API with an OMX layer on top of it. I obviously think V4L2 is a better option than any proprietary kernel/userspace interface. This being said, the complexity of the hardware sometimes leads people to believe that a custom API would be better (or at least easier to implement). I asked for more information about the hardware to get a better picture on this. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart -- 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
