Hi Hans
On Tue, 27 Sep 2011, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> On Thursday, September 08, 2011 09:45:15 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > A possibility to preallocate and initialise buffers of different sizes
> > in V4L2 is required for an efficient implementation of a snapshot
> > mode. This patch adds two new ioctl()s: VIDIOC_CREATE_BUFS and
> > VIDIOC_PREPARE_BUF and defines respective data structures.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@xxxxxx>
> > ---
> >
> > v7: added the "experimental" comment, as suggested by Sakari - thanks.
> >
> > drivers/media/video/v4l2-compat-ioctl32.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> > drivers/media/video/v4l2-ioctl.c | 29 ++++++++++++
> > include/linux/videodev2.h | 17 +++++++
> > include/media/v4l2-ioctl.h | 2 +
> > 4 files changed, 107 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
[snip]
> > diff --git a/include/linux/videodev2.h b/include/linux/videodev2.h
> > index a5359c6..6e87ea9 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/videodev2.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/videodev2.h
> > @@ -653,6 +653,9 @@ struct v4l2_buffer {
> > #define V4L2_BUF_FLAG_ERROR 0x0040
> > #define V4L2_BUF_FLAG_TIMECODE 0x0100 /* timecode field is valid */
> > #define V4L2_BUF_FLAG_INPUT 0x0200 /* input field is valid */
> > +/* Cache handling flags */
> > +#define V4L2_BUF_FLAG_NO_CACHE_INVALIDATE 0x0400
> > +#define V4L2_BUF_FLAG_NO_CACHE_CLEAN 0x0800
> >
> > /*
> > * O V E R L A Y P R E V I E W
> > @@ -2098,6 +2101,15 @@ struct v4l2_dbg_chip_ident {
> > __u32 revision; /* chip revision, chip specific */
> > } __attribute__ ((packed));
> >
> > +/* VIDIOC_CREATE_BUFS */
> > +struct v4l2_create_buffers {
> > + __u32 index; /* output: buffers index...index + count - 1 have been created */
> > + __u32 count;
> > + enum v4l2_memory memory;
> > + struct v4l2_format format; /* "type" is used always, the rest if sizeimage == 0 */
> > + __u32 reserved[8];
> > +};
> > +
> > /*
> > * 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
> > *
> > @@ -2188,6 +2200,11 @@ 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)
> >
> > +/* Experimental, the below two ioctls may change over the next couple of kernel
> > + versions */
> > +#define VIDIOC_CREATE_BUFS _IOWR('V', 92, struct v4l2_create_buffers)
> > +#define VIDIOC_PREPARE_BUF _IOW('V', 93, struct v4l2_buffer)
>
> I think I would prefer _IOWR here. QBUF etc. also use IOWR and you never know
> what you might return in the future. At the very least using IOWR allows us
> to update the state field, which would be a perfectly reasonable thing to do.
Sorry, which state field do you mean? We have already marked these ioctl()
as experimental, isn't this enough?
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
