Arnd,
you are correct that omx and v4l2 sit at different levels one being userside API and other being kernel API.But from the point of view of integrating these API's in OS frameworks like gstreamer,Android camera service they are at the same level.I mean one will have to implement gstreamer source plugin based on either v4l2 or Omx.Also the way vendors(STE and TI) have gone about implementing OMX, they completely bypass v4l2 .The major reason being code sharing among different OS environments.The kernel side for OMX implementation just facilitates RPC between imaging coprocessor and ARM side..
Sachin
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 2:00 PM, Lee Jones lee.jones@linaro.org wrote:
Bringing in my boys.
Robert, Linus, what say you?
On 07/02/11 12:33, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Monday 07 February 2011, Sachin Gupta wrote:
In Multimedia WG we have been posed with a question regarding bestway
to expose low level API for camera.so this a questions mainly about pros
and
cons of v4l2 and omx over each other.So to involve a wider community to discuss this topic I am floating this mail on linaro-dev.Please share
your
view/experiences.Also please involve any body else in this mail who can provide valuable inputs on this.
I've had to look up with "omx" actually stands for [1][2], but from an outsider view, they don't seem to be mutually exclusive or even competing interfaces. v4l2 is the interface you use to get at camera data, in whatever format the camera gives you. There are no alternatives to that. OpenMax gives you a way to accelerate video codecs, which is good, but this sits a layer higher up in the stack. Supporting omx is probably a good idea, but would be totally optional.
Arnd[1] http://www.khronos.org/openmax/ [2] http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/GstOpenMAX
linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev