On Monday 28 February 2011 11:21:52 Hans Verkuil wrote:
On Monday, February 28, 2011 11:11:47 Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Saturday 26 February 2011 13:12:42 Hans Verkuil wrote:
On Friday, February 25, 2011 18:22:51 Linus Walleij wrote:
2011/2/24 Edward Hervey bilboed@gmail.com:
What *needs* to be solved is an API for data allocation/passing at the kernel level which v4l2,omx,X,GL,vdpau,vaapi,... can use and that userspace (like GStreamer) can pass around, monitor and know about.
I think the patches sent out from ST-Ericsson's Johan Mossberg to linux-mm for "HWMEM" (hardware memory) deals exactly with buffer passing, pinning of buffers and so on. The CMA (Contigous Memory Allocator) has been slightly modified to fit hand-in-glove with HWMEM, so CMA provides buffers, HWMEM pass them around.
Johan, when you re-spin the HWMEM patchset, can you include linaro-dev and linux-media in the CC?
Yes, please. This sounds promising and we at linux-media would very much like to take a look at this. I hope that the CMA + HWMEM combination is exactly what we need.
Once again let me restate what I've been telling for some time: CMA must be *optional*. Not all hardware need contiguous memory. I'll have a look at the next HWMEM version.
Yes, it is optional when you look at specific hardware. On a kernel level however it is functionality that is required in order to support all the hardware. There is little point in solving one issue and not the other.
I agree. What I meant is that we need to make sure there's no HWMEM -> CMA dependency.