On 24.11.2011 19:47, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Em 24-11-2011 16:13, Manu Abraham escreveu: >> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 11:38 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab >> <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Em 24-11-2011 16:01, Manu Abraham escreveu: >>>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 11:14 PM, Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> On Thursday, November 24, 2011 18:08:05 Andreas Oberritter wrote: >>>>>> Don't break existing Userspace APIs for no reason! It's OK to add the >>>>>> new API, but - pretty please - don't just blindly remove audio.h and >>>>>> video.h. They are in use since many years by av7110, out-of-tree drivers >>>>>> *and more importantly* by applications. Yes, I know, you'd like to see >>>>>> those out-of-tree drivers merged, but it isn't possible for many >>>>>> reasons. And even if they were merged, you'd say "Port them and your >>>>>> apps to V4L". No! That's not an option. >>>>> >>>>> I'm not breaking anything. All apps will still work. >>>>> >>>>> One option (and it depends on whether people like it or not) is to have >>>>> audio.h, video.h and osd.h just include av7110.h and add a #warning >>>>> that these headers need to be replaced by the new av7110.h. >>>> >>>> >>>> That won't work with other non av7110 hardware. >>> >>> There isn't any non-av7110 driver using it at the Kernel. Anyway, we can put >>> a warning at the existing headers as-is, for now, putting them to be removed >>> for a new kernel version, like 3.4. >> >> >> No, that's not an option. The to-be merged saa716x driver depends on it. > > If the driver is not merged yet, it can be changed. > >> A DVB alone device need not depend V4L2 for it's operation. > > Why not? DVB drivers with IR should implement the input/event/IR API. DVB drivers with net > should implement the Linux Network API. DVB doesn't specify IR. There's no such thing like a DVB IR device. IP over DVB is implemented transparently. No driver needs to do anything but register its device's MAC address, therefore no driver implements the Linux Network API. > There is nothing wrong on using the ALSA API for audio and the V4L2 API for video, > as both API fits the needs for decoding audio and video streams, and new features > could be added there when needed. Yes. There's nothing wrong with it and I'm not complaining. I don't care about the implementation of the API in ivtv either. Just don't remove the API from dvb-core, period. > Duplicated API's that become legacy are removed with time. Just to mention two > notable cases, this happened with the old audio stack (OSS), with the old Wireless > stack. I can still use iwconfig and linux/wireless.h is still available on my system. ALSA still provides OSS emulation and the real OSS stack was marked deprecated but still present for ages. In contrast, you want to remove a stable API and introduce a new *completely untested* API between 3.3 and 3.4. > Do you have any issues that needs to be addressed by the V4L2 API for it to fit > on your needs? I don't want to be forced to use the V4L2 API for no reason and no gain. >> Also, it doesn't >> make any sense to have device specific headers to be used by an application, >> when drivers share more than one commonality. > > The only in-kernel driver using audio/video/osd is av7110. Once again: Manu is going to submit a new driver soon. You're trying to remove an API that you've never used. The people who use the API want it to stay. Regards, Andreas -- 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
