Hi Hans,
Thanks for your inputs.We are part of Linaro organisation For more details on Linaro please refer to http://www.linaro.org . As part of our activities on Linaro we have been debating at whats the right solution for exposing camera support / features on a platform Openmax or v4l2.
Also can you share some details/docs on how userside library/v4l2 partitioning is supposed to work.
Thanks Sachin
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Hans Verkuil hverkuil@xs4all.nl wrote:
On Wednesday, February 09, 2011 07:34:09 Sachin Gupta wrote:
Looking at ppt from Robert , it seems v4l2 subdevices is the way to
support
different devices that may be involved in imaging processing chain, also from the ppt it seems a userside library for Media controller is needed particular to each platform which controls these subdevices.I have not
been
able to find detailed documentation on this but it seems we are talking about custom solution for every platform based on platform topology for image processing chain.
It is not clear yet whether custom libraries will be needed or not. For omap3 (the first driver to use the media controller) it doesn't seem to be needed (yet?).
However, the complexity of some of these video systems is such that I can't help thinking that some library will be required to simplify the use of such hardware.
In general it will not be possible to make a completely generic solution for video subsystems that will work everywhere. The various architectures simply are too varied for that. The media controller will go some way to solving this, but a 100% solution is in practice impossible.
If you go only for a subset (for example, setting up a standard simple pipeline for a camera-type system), you are probably able to make something generic, but if you want to get full control over such systems in order to get the best possible quality, then you will have to customize your code for that particular hardware.
It might help me if I could get a better idea of what you are working on and what the goal is. I came in in the middle of the discussion and I think I'm missing some of the pieces :-)
Regards,
HansOn Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Subash Patel subash.rp@samsung.com
wrote:
In the reference architecture in ppt, we can directly wait for the RSZ interrupt, if we configure the hardware pipe. It was my
mis-understanding as
each of those hardware blocks can deliver interrupts too. In that way
ARM
needs to just work at finished frame, like forward it to the display or codec engine etc. V4L2 can be easily used for such hardware
architecture.
But if a ISP chooses to do the above work in a seperate (dsp)processor,
can
we still use V4L2? OMX seems better in such environment. Let me know if there is any other alternative.
Regards, Subash _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
-- Hans Verkuil - video4linux developer - sponsored by Cisco