On Tue, 5 Apr 2011, Hans Verkuil wrote: > On Tuesday, April 05, 2011 14:21:03 Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Friday 01 April 2011 10:13:02 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: [snip] > > > /* > > > * I O C T L C O D E S F O R V I D E O D E V I C E S > > > * > > > @@ -1937,6 +1957,10 @@ struct v4l2_dbg_chip_ident { > > > #define VIDIOC_SUBSCRIBE_EVENT _IOW('V', 90, struct > > > v4l2_event_subscription) #define VIDIOC_UNSUBSCRIBE_EVENT _IOW('V', 91, > > > struct v4l2_event_subscription) > > > > > > +#define VIDIOC_CREATE_BUFS _IOWR('V', 92, struct v4l2_create_buffers) > > > +#define VIDIOC_DESTROY_BUFS _IOWR('V', 93, struct v4l2_buffer_span) > > > +#define VIDIOC_SUBMIT_BUF _IOW('V', 94, int) > > > + > > > > In case we later need to pass other information (such as flags) to > > VIDIOC_SUBMIT_BUF, you should use a structure instead of an int. > > I would just pass struct v4l2_buffer to this ioctl, just like QBUF/DQBUF do. Why??? You do not need all that extra information. Well, we could, of course, make a struct with reserved fields... but it seems nice to me to have the clarity here - this ioctl() _only_ gives buffer ownership to the kernel. No more configuration... 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