Em 22-11-2011 08:05, Hans Verkuil escreveu: > From: Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@xxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/media/video/vivi.c | 5 +++-- > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/media/video/vivi.c b/drivers/media/video/vivi.c > index 7d754fb..84ea88d 100644 > --- a/drivers/media/video/vivi.c > +++ b/drivers/media/video/vivi.c > @@ -819,8 +819,9 @@ static int vidioc_querycap(struct file *file, void *priv, > strcpy(cap->driver, "vivi"); > strcpy(cap->card, "vivi"); > strlcpy(cap->bus_info, dev->v4l2_dev.name, sizeof(cap->bus_info)); > - cap->capabilities = V4L2_CAP_VIDEO_CAPTURE | V4L2_CAP_STREAMING | \ > - V4L2_CAP_READWRITE; > + cap->capabilities = V4L2_CAP_VIDEO_CAPTURE | V4L2_CAP_STREAMING | > + V4L2_CAP_READWRITE | V4L2_CAP_DEVICE_CAPS; > + cap->device_caps = cap->capabilities; Hmm... should V4L2_CAP_DEVICE_CAPS be present at both device_caps and capabilities? IMHO, the better would be to do: cap->device_caps = V4L2_CAP_VIDEO_CAPTURE | V4L2_CAP_STREAMING | V4L2_CAP_READWRITE | V4L2_CAP_DEVICE_CAPS; cap->capabilities = cap->device_caps | V4L2_CAP_DEVICE_CAPS; Btw, this ambiguity should also be solved at the V4L2 spec. Regards, Mauro -- 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
