Hi All,
I have sent an invitation for 3pm UTC Monday 7th March to have a
discussion on things that can be explored/worked upon in Linaro related to
v4l2 support.The idea is to come out with concrete activities that can be
targeted in Linaro MM WG to address this topic.
If any body is unhappy wi
On Mon, 2011-02-28 at 09:50 +0100, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> Hello,
[...]
>
> I'm not sure that highmem is the right solution. First, this will force
> systems with rather small amount of memory (like 256M) to use highmem just
> to support DMA allocable memory. It also doesn't solve the issue with
Hello,
On Tuesday, March 01, 2011 11:26 AM Edward Hervey wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-02-28 at 09:50 +0100, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> > Hello,
> [...]
> >
> > I'm not sure that highmem is the right solution. First, this will force
> > systems with rather small amount of memory (like 256M) to use highmem
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 :
> > > > > What *n
On Sunday, February 27, 2011 20:49:37 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Saturday 26 February 2011, Edward Hervey wrote:
> > >
> > > Are there any gstreamer/linaro/etc core developers attending the ELC in
San Francisco
> > > in April? I think it might be useful to get together before, during or
after the
On 28 February 2011 11:33, Laurent Pinchart <
laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com> wrote:
> 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, Feb
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 :
> > > 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 an
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 :
> > > > What *needs* to be solved is an API for data allocation/passing at
the
>
On Sunday 27 February 2011 20:49:37 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Saturday 26 February 2011, Edward Hervey wrote:
> > > Are there any gstreamer/linaro/etc core developers attending the ELC in
> > > San Francisco in April? I think it might be useful to get together
> > > before, during or after the conf
Hello,
On Saturday, February 26, 2011 8:20 PM Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Feb 2011, Kyungmin Park wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 2:22 AM, Linus Walleij
> > wrote:
> > > 2011/2/24 Edward Hervey :
> > >
> > >> What *needs* to be solved is an API for data allocation/passing at the
>
Hi All,
Linaro is currently collecting requirements for next cycle.If you all agree
we can set up a call to discuss what could be interesting things on this
topic to work on next cycle and then I can take the ideas generated for
approval to Linaro TSC.
Thanks
Sachin
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 1:19
On Saturday 26 February 2011, Edward Hervey wrote:
> >
> > Are there any gstreamer/linaro/etc core developers attending the ELC in San
> > Francisco
> > in April? I think it might be useful to get together before, during or
> > after the
> > conference and see if we can turn this discussion in s
On Sat, 26 Feb 2011, Kyungmin Park wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 2:22 AM, Linus Walleij
> wrote:
> > 2011/2/24 Edward Hervey :
> >
> >> 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
On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 2:22 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> 2011/2/24 Edward Hervey :
>
>> 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.
On Sat, 2011-02-26 at 14:47 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> On Saturday, February 26, 2011 14:38:50 Felipe Contreras wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Laurent Pinchart
> > wrote:
> > >> > Perhaps GStreamer experts would like to comment on the future plans
> > >> > ahead
> > >> > for zero c
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Robert Fekete wrote:
> To make a long story short:
> Different vendors provide custom OpenMax solutions for say Camera/ISP. In
> the Linux eco-system there is V4L2 doing much of this work already and is
> evolving with mediacontroller as well. Then there is th
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 3:04 PM, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> On Thursday, February 24, 2011 13:29:56 Linus Walleij wrote:
>> 2011/2/23 Sachin Gupta :
>>
>> > The imaging coprocessor in today's platforms have a general purpose DSP
>> > attached to it I have seen some work being done to use this DSP
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Laurent Pinchart
wrote:
>> > Perhaps GStreamer experts would like to comment on the future plans ahead
>> > for zero copying/IPC and low power HW use cases? Could Gstreamer adapt
>> > some ideas from OMX IL making OMX IL obsolete?
>>
>> perhaps OMX should adapt som
On Saturday, February 26, 2011 14:38:50 Felipe Contreras wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Laurent Pinchart
> wrote:
> >> > Perhaps GStreamer experts would like to comment on the future plans ahead
> >> > for zero copying/IPC and low power HW use cases? Could Gstreamer adapt
> >> > some id
On Friday, February 25, 2011 18:22:51 Linus Walleij wrote:
> 2011/2/24 Edward Hervey :
>
> > 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 kno
2011/2/24 Edward Hervey :
> 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 Mossb
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 7:10 AM, Laurent Pinchart
wrote:
> On Thursday 24 February 2011 14:04:19 Hans Verkuil wrote:
>> On Thursday, February 24, 2011 13:29:56 Linus Walleij wrote:
>> > 2011/2/23 Sachin Gupta :
>> > > The imaging coprocessor in today's platforms have a general purpose DSP
>> > > a
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 7:17 AM, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> There are two parts to this: first of all you need a way to allocate large
> buffers. The CMA patch series is available (but not yet merged) that does
> this.
> I'm not sure of the latest status of this series.
>
> The other part is that ever
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Edward Hervey wrote:
>
> 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.
yes yes yes yes!!
vaapi/vdpa
Liberty
> > > of inviting both linux-me...@vger.kernel.org and
> > > gstreamer-de...@lists.freedesktop.org. For any newcomer I really
> > > recommend to do some catch-up reading on
> > > http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-dev/2011-February/thread.html
>
streamer-de...@lists.freedesktop.org. For any newcomer I really recommend
> > to do some catch-up reading on
> > http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-dev/2011-February/thread.html
> > ("v4l2 vs omx for camera" thread) before making any comments. And sign up
> &g
edesktop.org. For any newcomer I really
> > recommend to do some catch-up reading on
> > http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-dev/2011-February/thread.html
> > ("v4l2 vs omx for camera" thread) before making any comments. And sign up
> > for Linaro-dev whil
o do some catch-up reading on
> http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-dev/2011-February/thread.html
> ("v4l2 vs omx for camera" thread) before making any comments. And sign
> up for Linaro-dev while you are at it :-)
>
> To make a long story short:
> Different vendors provi
On Thursday 24 February 2011 14:04:19 Hans Verkuil wrote:
> On Thursday, February 24, 2011 13:29:56 Linus Walleij wrote:
> > 2011/2/23 Sachin Gupta :
> > > The imaging coprocessor in today's platforms have a general purpose DSP
> > > attached to it I have seen some work being done to use this DSP f
2011/2/23 Sachin Gupta :
> The imaging coprocessor in today's platforms have a general purpose DSP
> attached to it I have seen some work being done to use this DSP for
> graphics/audio processing in case the camera use case is not being tried or
> also if the camera usecases does not consume the
p reading on
> >> > http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-dev/2011-February/thread.html
> >> > ("v4l2 vs omx for camera" thread) before making any comments. And sign
> >> > up for Linaro-dev while you are at it :-)
> >> >
> >> > T
On Thursday, February 24, 2011 13:29:56 Linus Walleij wrote:
> 2011/2/23 Sachin Gupta :
>
> > The imaging coprocessor in today's platforms have a general purpose DSP
> > attached to it I have seen some work being done to use this DSP for
> > graphics/audio processing in case the camera use case is
On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 21:19 +0100, Edward Hervey wrote:
>
> Will GStreamer be as cpu/memory efficient as a pure OMX solution ?
> No,
> I seriously doubt we'll break down all the fundamental notions in
> GStreamer to make it use 0 cpu when running some processing.
I blame late night mails...
the Liberty of
>> > inviting both linux-me...@vger.kernel.org and
>> > gstreamer-de...@lists.freedesktop.org. For any newcomer I really recommend
>> > to do some catch-up reading on
>> > http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-dev/2011-February/thread.html
> > to do some catch-up reading on
> > http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-dev/2011-February/thread.html
> > ("v4l2 vs omx for camera" thread) before making any comments. And sign up
> > for Linaro-dev while you are at it :-)
> >
> > To make a long
atch-up reading on
> http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-dev/2011-February/thread.html
> ("v4l2 vs omx for camera" thread) before making any comments. And sign up
> for Linaro-dev while you are at it :-)
>
> To make a long story short:
> Different vendors provide c
/thread.html("v4l2
vs omx for camera" thread) before making any comments. And sign up
for Linaro-dev while you are at it :-)
To make a long story short:
Different vendors provide custom OpenMax solutions for say Camera/ISP. In
the Linux eco-system there is V4L2 doing much of this work alre
On Thursday 10 February 2011 08:47:15 Hans Verkuil wrote:
> On Thursday, February 10, 2011 08:17:31 Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Harald Gustafsson wrote:
> > > OMX main purpose is to handle multimedia hardware and offer an
> > > interface to that HW that looks identical
> Regarding using V4L to communicate with DSPs/other processors: that too
> could be something for Linaro to pick up: experiment with it for one
> particular
> board, see what (if anything) is needed to make this work. I expect it to be
> pretty easy, but again, nobody has actually done the initia
On Thursday, February 10, 2011 08:17:31 Linus Walleij wrote:
> Thanks for the help Harald, much appreciated.
>
> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Harald Gustafsson
> wrote:
>
> > OMX main purpose is to handle multimedia hardware and offer an
> > interface to that HW that looks identical indenpend
On Thursday 10 February 2011 08:17:31 Linus Walleij wrote:
>
> > OMX main purpose is to handle multimedia hardware and offer an
> > interface to that HW that looks identical indenpendent of the vendor
> > delivering that hardware, much like the v4l2 or USB subsystems tries to
> > do. And yes optim
Thanks for the help Harald, much appreciated.
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Harald Gustafsson
wrote:
> OMX main purpose is to handle multimedia hardware and offer an
> interface to that HW that looks identical indenpendent of the vendor
> delivering that hardware, much like the v4l2 or USB sub
Hi Robert and all,
On Tuesday 08 February 2011 14:48:21 Robert Fekete wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for your ideas.
>
> If I am not mistaken all subdevices in the ISP media pipe could be
> interconnected without the need from ARM intervention. But I could be
> wrong.
>
> Why not ask Hans Verkuil and
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> Exceptions are DSPs/processors. While it is definitely possible to use V4L2
> there as well, in practice I don't see this happening anytime soon. It would
> be a very interesting experiment though.
In drivers/staging/tidspbridge
http://omappe
@xs4all.nl]
> Sent: den 9 februari 2011 20:07
> To: Linus Walleij
> Cc: linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org; Lee Jones; ST-Ericsson LT
> Mailing List; Harald Gustafsson
> Subject: Re: [st-ericsson] v4l2 vs omx for camera
>
> On Wednesday, February 09, 2011 18:11:22 Linus Walleij wrote
On Wednesday, February 09, 2011 12:50:27 Sachin Gupta wrote:
> 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
On Wednesday, February 09, 2011 18:11:22 Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:30 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
>
> Robert, Linus, what say you?
> >
>
> [I'm looping in Harald from Ericsson who worked with Khronos
> so he can correct me for all inevitable mistakes in trying to
> understand how
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:30 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
Robert, Linus, what say you?
>
[I'm looping in Harald from Ericsson who worked with Khronos
so he can correct me for all inevitable mistakes in trying to
understand how Khronos works.]
I mainly come from the kernel for kernels' sake side of thing
On 09.02.2011 08:34, Hans Verkuil wrote:
On Wednesday, February 09, 2011 07:23:49 Subash Patel 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 in
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
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
> particula
On Wednesday, February 09, 2011 07:23:49 Subash Patel 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
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
ab
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 co
gstreamer is looked as a broker by many media
>> applications.
>>
>> Gstreamer will appropriately forward controls to v4L2 or OMX depending
>> on
>> how the hardware is delivering the frames.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Subash
>>
>
On Tue, Feb 08, 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> while gst-openmax
> is currently not even packaged for ubuntu.
I think this is because gst-openmax needs to be built against
BSP-specific omx headers, and this means we need some of these headers
On Tuesday 08 February 2011, SUBASH PATEL wrote:
> Sent: Sachin Gupta
> >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,Andro
ntegrating a new sensor which has in-built accelerator, it makes
sense to reduce the silicon area on SoC and use V4L2 instead.
Regards,
Subash
---Original Message
Sent: Sachin Gupta
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 14:25:21 +0530
Subject: Re: v4l2 vs omx for camera
Arnd,
you are corr
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 s
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 best way
>> to expose low level API for camera.so this a questions mainly about pros and
On Monday 07 February 2011, Sachin Gupta wrote:
> In Multimedia WG we have been posed with a question regarding best way
> 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
Hi All,
In Multimedia WG we have been posed with a question regarding best way
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 sh
62 matches
Mail list logo
