On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 12:53:32PM +0200, Hans Verkuil wrote: > On Wednesday, June 29, 2011 12:30:26 Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > Hi Hans, > > > > On Wednesday 29 June 2011 12:06:57 Hans Verkuil wrote: > > > > On Tuesday 28 June 2011 17:18:07 Hans Verkuil wrote: > > > >> Originally no control events would go to the filehandle that called the > > > >> VIDIOC_S_CTRL/VIDIOC_S_EXT_CTRLS ioctls. This was to prevent a feedback > > > >> loop. > > > >> > > > >> This is now only done if the new V4L2_EVENT_SUB_FL_NO_FEEDBACK flag is > > > >> set. > > > > > > > > What about doing it the other way around ? Most applications won't want > > > > that feedback, you could disable it by default. > > > > > > I thought about that, but that's harder to explain since that flag would > > > then suppress an exception to the normal handling of event. > > > > > > It's easier to say: events are sent to everyone, but if you set this flag, > > > then we make this exception. > > > > Events are sent to everyone but you, but if you set this flag, you get them > as > > well. > > I thought about it a bit more, and a better reason for changing this to > ALLOW_FEEDBACK is that it forces you to think about the consequences of > setting this flag. > > I'll change it. Thanks. I just read the thread, and agree to the conclusion. Doing it the other way around might help producing a number of ill behaving applications. Regards, -- Sakari Ailus sakari.ailus@xxxxxx -- 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
