Remove

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



-----Original Message-----
From: video4linux-list-admin@xxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:video4linux-list-admin@xxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Bill Dirks
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 11:44 AM
To: video4linux-list@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re:  Frame buffer memory management V4L API considerations


Chris Worley wrote:
> My video hardware and frame buffer are tightly integrated (a capture
> engine that receives decoded video input on the front end of a
> non-visible portion of the frame buffer, and an overlay engine that
> blends the video and graphics on the back end for output).  I think
> this tight integration will be used by many cards in the future (video
> and graphics cards will be the same, as with the ATI All-In-Wonder,
> and Matrox Marvel).
> 
> The frame buffer memory used by the video hardware must be accounted
> for and managed from user space, but it should be the V4L driver that
> responds with the amount of memory currently required by the video
> hardware.
> [...]
> Should the V4L2 specification be adjusted for this consideration?  Or,
> how best would this be implemented?


This is normally done by creating custom ioctls.

These funtions are only used by the X server modules, not the user
application, right? And v4l/V4L2 driver and X driver need to be designed
and maintained "together" anyway. So just add whatever ioctl functions
for the communication between X and the Video for Linux kernel driver
you need for your system.

Bill.



_______________________________________________
Video4linux-list mailing list
Video4linux-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/video4linux-list





[Index of Archives]     [Linux DVB]     [Video Disk Recorder]     [Asterisk]     [Photo]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Xorg]     [Util Linux NG]     [Xfree86]     [Free Photo Albums]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Women]     [ALSA Users]     [ALSA Devel]     [Linux USB]

Powered by Linux