From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mx3.redhat.com (mx3.redhat.com [172.16.48.32]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m91JkmWw002482 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 2008 15:46:48 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by mx3.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id m91Jkcde029905 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 2008 15:46:38 -0400 Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 21:46:17 +0200 From: Daniel =?iso-8859-1?Q?Gl=F6ckner?= To: Vinicius Kamakura Message-ID: <20081001194617.GA226@daniel.bse> References: <20080908160012.574456184D5@hormel.redhat.com> <48C5948D.5030504@migmasys.com> <20080909190727.GA2184@daniel.bse> <3ebb0dc80809300125n24567d11kf4b414b7909c8270@mail.gmail.com> <20080930121259.GA237@daniel.bse> <3ebb0dc80810011127v38c55961yd37cd13e32fcc829@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3ebb0dc80810011127v38c55961yd37cd13e32fcc829@mail.gmail.com> Cc: video4linux-list@redhat.com Subject: Re: a multichannel capture problem List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: video4linux-list-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: video4linux-list-bounces@redhat.com List-ID: On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 03:27:39PM -0300, Vinicius Kamakura wrote: > Isn't that the same as using the VIDIOC_S_INPUT ioctl? > Or is there a performance gain (less field/frame skipping) on doing that? I wanted the lowest latency and the least impact on the hardware. Doing m[1]^=0x20; should be faster than calling the kernel to do it. It was a quick hack.. Daniel -- video4linux-list mailing list Unsubscribe mailto:video4linux-list-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/video4linux-list