Re: Software-only image processing for Intel "complex" cameras

[Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1326 bytes --]

Hi!

> > > e. g. something like:
> > > 
> > > 	board_vendor = dmi_get_system_info(DMI_BOARD_VENDOR);
> > > 	board_name = dmi_get_system_info(DMI_BOARD_NAME);
> > > 	board_version = dmi_get_system_info(DMI_BOARD_NAME);
> > > 	product_name = dmi_get_system_info(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME);
> > > 	product_version = dmi_get_system_info(DMI_PRODUCT_VERSION);
> > > 
> > > 	sprintf(dev->cap, "%s:%s:%s:%s", board_vendor, board_name,
> > > board_version, product_name, product_version);
> > > 
> > > (the real code should check if the values are filled, as not all BIOS vendors use the
> > > same DMI fields)
> > > 
> > > With that, the library can auto-adjust without needing to run anything as
> > > root.
> > >   
> > Well actually most of those fields you're interested in are already exposed to userspace
> > through sysfs /sys/class/dmi/id/
> > 
> > Can't the library just pull them from there?
> 
> Good point. Yeah, the library could use them.

This could be done, but it would be better if libraries could query
neccessary information from v4l2 drivers.

If DMI was used, _library_ would need to know about new hardware,
which is  not desirable.
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]