Hi Rémi, On Tuesday 01 November 2011 13:36:50 Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote: > On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 13:24:35 +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > We should instead fix the V4L2 specification to mandate the use of a > > monotonic clock (which could then also support hardware timestamps when > > they are available). Would such a change be acceptable ? > > I'd rather have the real time clock everywhere, than a driver-dependent > clock, if it comes to that. That's my opinion as well. Modifying drivers to use a monotonic clock is easy, and I can provide patches. The real issue is whether this can be accepted, as it would change the spec. > Nevertheless, I agree that the monotonic clock is better than the real > time clock. > In user space, VLC, Gstreamer already switched to monotonic a while ago as > far as I know. > > And I guess there is no way to detect this, other than detect ridiculously > large gap between the timestamp and the current clock value? That's right. We could add a device capability flag if needed, but that wouldn't help older applications that expect system time in the timestamps. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart -- 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
