Hi Guennadi,
I find that your idea of "provide a generic framebuffer driver
that could sit on top of a v4l output driver", which may be a good
solution of our LCD controller driver, or maybe much more other SOC
LCD drivers. V4L2 interface support many features than framebuffer for
video playback usage, such as buffer queue/dequeue, quality control,
etc. However, framebuffer is common for UI display. Implement two
drivers for one controller is a challenge for current architecture.
I am interested in your idea. Could you elaborate it? Or do you
think multifunction driver is the right solution for this the
scenario?
Right, we have discussed this idea at the V4L2/MC mini-summit earlier this
year, there the outcome was, that the idea is not bad, but it is easy
enough to create such framebuffer additions on top of specific v4l2 output
drivers anyway, so, noone was interested enough to start designing and
implementing such a generic wrapper driver. However, I've heard, that this
topic has also been scheduled for discussion at another v4l / kernel
meeting (plumbers?), so, someone might be looking into implementing
this... If you yourself would like to do that - feel free to propose a
design on both mailing lists (fbdev added to cc), then we can discuss it,
and you can implement it;)
Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
Hi Guennadi,
I find that your idea of "provide a generic framebuffer driver
that could sit on top of a v4l output driver", which may be a good
solution of our LCD controller driver, or maybe much more other SOC
LCD drivers. V4L2 interface support many features than framebuffer for
video playback usage, such as buffer queue/dequeue, quality control,
etc. However, framebuffer is common for UI display. Implement two
drivers for one controller is a challenge for current architecture.
I am interested in your idea. Could you elaborate it? Or do you
think multifunction driver is the right solution for this the
scenario?
Right, we have discussed this idea at the V4L2/MC mini-summit earlier this
year, there the outcome was, that the idea is not bad, but it is easy
enough to create such framebuffer additions on top of specific v4l2 output
drivers anyway, so, noone was interested enough to start designing and
implementing such a generic wrapper driver. However, I've heard, that this
topic has also been scheduled for discussion at another v4l / kernel
meeting (plumbers?), so, someone might be looking into implementing
this... If you yourself would like to do that - feel free to propose a
design on both mailing lists (fbdev added to cc), then we can discuss it,
and you can implement it;)
Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
Good to know others are also interested in it. I surely can contribute
to it. But my concern is how to support Xwindow. Android and Ubuntu
should both run on our platform. Queue/deque should work well for
Android UI. I still can not figure out how to support Xwindow, for it
does not interact with driver after it get the mmaped buffer.
Jun
Hi Guennadi,
I find that your idea of "provide a generic framebuffer driver
that could sit on top of a v4l output driver", which may be a good
solution of our LCD controller driver, or maybe much more other SOC
LCD drivers. V4L2 interface support many features than framebuffer for
video playback usage, such as buffer queue/dequeue, quality control,
etc. However, framebuffer is common for UI display. Implement two
drivers for one controller is a challenge for current architecture.
I am interested in your idea. Could you elaborate it? Or do you
think multifunction driver is the right solution for this the
scenario?
Right, we have discussed this idea at the V4L2/MC mini-summit earlier this
year, there the outcome was, that the idea is not bad, but it is easy
enough to create such framebuffer additions on top of specific v4l2 output
drivers anyway, so, noone was interested enough to start designing and
implementing such a generic wrapper driver. However, I've heard, that this
topic has also been scheduled for discussion at another v4l / kernel
meeting (plumbers?), so, someone might be looking into implementing
this... If you yourself would like to do that - feel free to propose a
design on both mailing lists (fbdev added to cc), then we can discuss it,
and you can implement it;)
Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
Good to know others are also interested in it. I surely can contribute
to it. But my concern is how to support Xwindow. Android and Ubuntu
should both run on our platform. Queue/deque should work well for
Android UI. I still can not figure out how to support Xwindow, for it
does not interact with driver after it get the mmaped buffer.
Jun
Guennadi,
Any idea on supporting this feature with V4L2 based FB? I can not
figure out any method and will adopt framebuffer for UI and V4L2 for
video layer for the schedule pressure.
Jun
Hi Guennadi,
I find that your idea of "provide a generic framebuffer driver
that could sit on top of a v4l output driver", which may be a good
solution of our LCD controller driver, or maybe much more other SOC
LCD drivers. V4L2 interface support many features than framebuffer for
video playback usage, such as buffer queue/dequeue, quality control,
etc. However, framebuffer is common for UI display. Implement two
drivers for one controller is a challenge for current architecture.
I am interested in your idea. Could you elaborate it? Or do you
think multifunction driver is the right solution for this the
scenario?
Right, we have discussed this idea at the V4L2/MC mini-summit earlier this
year, there the outcome was, that the idea is not bad, but it is easy
enough to create such framebuffer additions on top of specific v4l2 output
drivers anyway, so, noone was interested enough to start designing and
implementing such a generic wrapper driver. However, I've heard, that this
topic has also been scheduled for discussion at another v4l / kernel
meeting (plumbers?), so, someone might be looking into implementing
this... If you yourself would like to do that - feel free to propose a
design on both mailing lists (fbdev added to cc), then we can discuss it,
and you can implement it;)
Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
Good to know others are also interested in it. I surely can contribute
to it. But my concern is how to support Xwindow. Android and Ubuntu
should both run on our platform. Queue/deque should work well for
Android UI. I still can not figure out how to support Xwindow, for it
does not interact with driver after it get the mmaped buffer.
Jun
Guennadi,
Any idea on supporting this feature with V4L2 based FB? I can not
figure out any method and will adopt framebuffer for UI and V4L2 for
video layer for the schedule pressure.
Hi Jun
Sorry, not sure I understand you right here. You are saying, that atm you
don't have the time to work on a generic solution and are going for a
specific one, right? Yes, that's what everybody is currently doing. And
you're asking whether I am working or am going to work on such a generic
solution? No, sorry, I don't think I'll have time for it either in the
near future.
Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
Hi Guennadi,
I find that your idea of "provide a generic framebuffer driver
that could sit on top of a v4l output driver", which may be a good
solution of our LCD controller driver, or maybe much more other SOC
LCD drivers. V4L2 interface support many features than framebuffer for
video playback usage, such as buffer queue/dequeue, quality control,
etc. However, framebuffer is common for UI display. Implement two
drivers for one controller is a challenge for current architecture.
I am interested in your idea. Could you elaborate it? Or do you
think multifunction driver is the right solution for this the
scenario?
Right, we have discussed this idea at the V4L2/MC mini-summit earlier this
year, there the outcome was, that the idea is not bad, but it is easy
enough to create such framebuffer additions on top of specific v4l2 output
drivers anyway, so, noone was interested enough to start designing and
implementing such a generic wrapper driver. However, I've heard, that this
topic has also been scheduled for discussion at another v4l / kernel
meeting (plumbers?), so, someone might be looking into implementing
this... If you yourself would like to do that - feel free to propose a
design on both mailing lists (fbdev added to cc), then we can discuss it,
and you can implement it;)
Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
Good to know others are also interested in it. I surely can contribute
to it. But my concern is how to support Xwindow. Android and Ubuntu
should both run on our platform. Queue/deque should work well for
Android UI. I still can not figure out how to support Xwindow, for it
does not interact with driver after it get the mmaped buffer.
Jun
Guennadi,
Any idea on supporting this feature with V4L2 based FB? I can not
figure out any method and will adopt framebuffer for UI and V4L2 for
video layer for the schedule pressure.
Hi Jun
Sorry, not sure I understand you right here. You are saying, that atm you
don't have the time to work on a generic solution and are going for a
specific one, right? Yes, that's what everybody is currently doing. And
you're asking whether I am working or am going to work on such a generic
solution? No, sorry, I don't think I'll have time for it either in the
near future.
Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
Hi Guennadi
I mean I have no idea on how to support Xwindow's requirement if FB
is based on V4L2. I can contribute on V4L2 based FB if it is clear.
But I will do as everbody does currently.
Jun
Hi Guennadi,
I find that your idea of "provide a generic framebuffer driver
that could sit on top of a v4l output driver", which may be a good
solution of our LCD controller driver, or maybe much more other SOC
LCD drivers. V4L2 interface support many features than framebuffer for
video playback usage, such as buffer queue/dequeue, quality control,
etc. However, framebuffer is common for UI display. Implement two
drivers for one controller is a challenge for current architecture.
I am interested in your idea. Could you elaborate it? Or do you
think multifunction driver is the right solution for this the
scenario?
Right, we have discussed this idea at the V4L2/MC mini-summit earlier this
year, there the outcome was, that the idea is not bad, but it is easy
enough to create such framebuffer additions on top of specific v4l2 output
drivers anyway, so, noone was interested enough to start designing and
implementing such a generic wrapper driver. However, I've heard, that this
topic has also been scheduled for discussion at another v4l / kernel
meeting (plumbers?), so, someone might be looking into implementing
this... If you yourself would like to do that - feel free to propose a
design on both mailing lists (fbdev added to cc), then we can discuss it,
and you can implement it;)
Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
Good to know others are also interested in it. I surely can contribute
to it. But my concern is how to support Xwindow. Android and Ubuntu
should both run on our platform. Queue/deque should work well for
Android UI. I still can not figure out how to support Xwindow, for it
does not interact with driver after it get the mmaped buffer.
Jun
Guennadi,
Any idea on supporting this feature with V4L2 based FB? I can not
figure out any method and will adopt framebuffer for UI and V4L2 for
video layer for the schedule pressure.
Hi Jun
Sorry, not sure I understand you right here. You are saying, that atm you
don't have the time to work on a generic solution and are going for a
specific one, right? Yes, that's what everybody is currently doing. And
you're asking whether I am working or am going to work on such a generic
solution? No, sorry, I don't think I'll have time for it either in the
near future.
Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
Hi Guennadi
I mean I have no idea on how to support Xwindow's requirement if FB
is based on V4L2. I can contribute on V4L2 based FB if it is clear.
But I will do as everbody does currently.
Maybe you didn't understand the concept of this driver then. The shole
idea is to have a v4l2 output driver as a base and add a framebuffer
translation layer on the top. Which would provide two interfaces to the
user: a v4l2 one with frame queuing etc, and a standard fb one, which
should be usable by any fb application (X, directfb,...) natively.
Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
Hi Guennadi,
I find that your idea of "provide a generic framebuffer driver
that could sit on top of a v4l output driver", which may be a good
solution of our LCD controller driver, or maybe much more other SOC
LCD drivers. V4L2 interface support many features than framebuffer for
video playback usage, such as buffer queue/dequeue, quality control,
etc. However, framebuffer is common for UI display. Implement two
drivers for one controller is a challenge for current architecture.
I am interested in your idea. Could you elaborate it? Or do you
think multifunction driver is the right solution for this the
scenario?
Right, we have discussed this idea at the V4L2/MC mini-summit earlier this
year, there the outcome was, that the idea is not bad, but it is easy
enough to create such framebuffer additions on top of specific v4l2 output
drivers anyway, so, noone was interested enough to start designing and
implementing such a generic wrapper driver. However, I've heard, that this
topic has also been scheduled for discussion at another v4l / kernel
meeting (plumbers?), so, someone might be looking into implementing
this... If you yourself would like to do that - feel free to propose a
design on both mailing lists (fbdev added to cc), then we can discuss it,
and you can implement it;)
Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
Good to know others are also interested in it. I surely can contribute
to it. But my concern is how to support Xwindow. Android and Ubuntu
should both run on our platform. Queue/deque should work well for
Android UI. I still can not figure out how to support Xwindow, for it
does not interact with driver after it get the mmaped buffer.
Jun
Guennadi,
Any idea on supporting this feature with V4L2 based FB? I can not
figure out any method and will adopt framebuffer for UI and V4L2 for
video layer for the schedule pressure.
Hi Jun
Sorry, not sure I understand you right here. You are saying, that atm you
don't have the time to work on a generic solution and are going for a
specific one, right? Yes, that's what everybody is currently doing. And
you're asking whether I am working or am going to work on such a generic
solution? No, sorry, I don't think I'll have time for it either in the
near future.
Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
Hi Guennadi
I mean I have no idea on how to support Xwindow's requirement if FB
is based on V4L2. I can contribute on V4L2 based FB if it is clear.
But I will do as everbody does currently.
Maybe you didn't understand the concept of this driver then. The shole
idea is to have a v4l2 output driver as a base and add a framebuffer
translation layer on the top. Which would provide two interfaces to the
user: a v4l2 one with frame queuing etc, and a standard fb one, which
should be usable by any fb application (X, directfb,...) natively.
Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
You mean fb with V4L2 interface will manage memory with video-buf and
standard fb interface still handle memory independently, ie. get
memory with dma_alloc_writecombine directly?
Thanks!
Jun