Hi Hans, On 07/08/2013 09:22 AM, Hans Verkuil wrote: > On Sun July 7 2013 23:50:30 Sylwester Nawrocki wrote: >> On 06/28/2013 02:27 PM, Hans Verkuil wrote: >>> This patch series adds support for matrices and motion detection and >>> converts the solo6x10 driver to use these new APIs. >>> >>> See the RFCv2 for details on the motion detection API: >>> >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg62085.html >>> >>> And this RFC for details on the matrix API (which superseeds the v4l2_md_blocks >>> in the RFC above): >>> >>> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.video-input-infrastructure/65195 >>> >>> I have tested this with the solo card, both global motion detection and >>> regional motion detection, and it works well. >>> >>> There is no documentation for the new APIs yet (other than the RFCs). I would >>> like to know what others think of this proposal before I start work on the >>> DocBook documentation. >> >> These 3 ioctls look pretty generic and will likely allow us to handle wide >> range of functionalities, similarly to what the controls framework does >> today. >> >> What I don't like in the current trend of the V4L2 API development >> though is >> that we have seemingly separate APIs for configuring integers, rectangles, >> matrices, etc. And interactions between those APIs sometimes happen to be >> not well defined. >> >> I'm not opposed to having this matrix API, but I would _much_ more like to >> see it as a starting point of a more powerful API, that would allow to >> model >> dependencies between parameters being configured and the objects more >> explicitly and freely (e.g. case of the per buffer controls), that would >> allow to pass a list of commands to the hardware for atomic >> re-configurations, >> that would allow to create hardware configuration contexts, etc., etc. >> >> But it's all song of future, requires lots of effort, founding and takes >> engineers with significant experience. >> >> As it likely won't happen soon I guess we can proceed with the matrix API >> for now. > > Do you attend the LPC in New Orleans? I would like to discuss this further, > but it is easier to do so face-to-face with a whiteboard. Alternatively, we > could set up a brainstorm session somewhere. This discussion keeps cropping > up time and again, perhaps we should start to do something about it :-) My apologies for the delay. I'm not planning to attend LPC, certainly discussing this in person sounds like a good idea. I will be most likely attending ELCE in Edinburg though, perhaps we could have some meeting organized there, if there are other persons interested in that. -- Regards, Sylwester -- 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
