From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([192.100.122.233]:16713 "EHLO mgw-mx06.nokia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750791Ab0BWH4M (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Feb 2010 02:56:12 -0500 Message-ID: <4B838A00.5060103@maxwell.research.nokia.com> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 09:55:44 +0200 From: Sakari Ailus MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hans Verkuil CC: linux-media@vger.kernel.org, Laurent Pinchart , david.cohen@nokia.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] V4L: Events: Add documentation References: <4B82A7FB.50505@maxwell.research.nokia.com> <201002230020.27454.hverkuil@xs4all.nl> <4B8312E2.4000201@maxwell.research.nokia.com> <201002230819.24988.hverkuil@xs4all.nl> In-Reply-To: <201002230819.24988.hverkuil@xs4all.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hans Verkuil wrote: > On Tuesday 23 February 2010 00:27:30 Sakari Ailus wrote: >> Hans Verkuil wrote: >>> On Monday 22 February 2010 23:47:49 Sakari Ailus wrote: >>>> Will be "There are standard and private events. New standard events must >>>> use the smallest available event type. The drivers must allocate their >>>> events starting from base (V4L2_EVENT_PRIVATE_START + n * 1024) + 1." in >>>> the next one. >>> >>> Ah, OK. But why '+ 1'? I don't really see a reason for that to be honest. >>> Am I missing something? >> >> Many V4L2 control classes do that. No other reason really. :-) Can be >> removed on my behalf. > > Then this can be removed. There are reasons for doing that with controls, but > those reasons do not apply to events (mostly to do with the CTRL_NEXT flag). Good point. Would we want to enumerate events in future perhaps? If so, it might still be a good idea to keep this for now. What do you think? -- Sakari Ailus sakari.ailus@maxwell.research.nokia.com