Hi Sakari, On 09/01/2011 10:47 AM, Sakari Ailus wrote: > On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 09:15:20AM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: >> On Thu, 1 Sep 2011, Sakari Ailus wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 03:27:49PM +0000, Bastian Hecht wrote: >>>> 2011/8/28 Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >>> [clip] >>>>> If I'm not mistaken V4L2_CID_PRIVATE_BASE is deprecated. >>>> >>>> I checked at http://v4l2spec.bytesex.org/spec/x542.htm, googled >>>> "V4L2_CID_PRIVATE_BASE deprecated" and read >>>> Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt. I couldn't find anything. >>> >>> Hmm. Did you happen to check when that has been written? :) >>> >>> Please use this one instead: >>> >>> <URL:http://hverkuil.home.xs4all.nl/spec/media.html> >> >> "Drivers can also implement their own custom controls using >> V4L2_CID_PRIVATE_BASE and higher values." >> >> Which specific location describes V4L2_CID_PRIVATE_BASE differently there? > > That was a general comment, not related to the private base. There's no > use for a three-year-old spec as a reference! > > The control framework does not support private controls, for example. The > controls should be put to their own class in videodev2.h nowadays, that's my > understanding. Cc Hans. Is this really the case that we close the door for private controls in the mainline kernel ? Or am I misunderstanding something ? How about v4l2_ctrl_new_custom() ? What if there are controls applicable to single driver only ? Do we really want to have plenty of such in videodev2.h ? -- Sylwester Nawrocki Samsung Poland R&D Center -- 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
