nitesh moundekar wrote: > Hi all, Hi Nitesh, > I am worried about direction v4l2 is taking. It looks against the basic > principle of driver i.e. hardware abstraction. So i think giving out pixel > clock, binning, skipping, bayer pattern, etc device varying features to user > space questionable. We can try to remain generic and proprietary or internal > device information can be exposed at subdev level or via sysfs. Welcome to the world of embedded devices... What this would provide you is a way to configure sensors in a generic way at low level without enforcing policies or putting artificial limitations in place while being able to better gain information on the capabilities of the devices in user space. This level of control is essential when implementing digital cameras, be they high end or low end in terms of hardware. If you're not doing that, then this interface might not be relevant to you. Also, this is not meant by any means to replace existing interfaces used by applications. -- Sakari Ailus sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- 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
