Re: Tentative agenda for Helsinki mini-summit

[Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>]

Hi,

I would like to add my "RFC: a processing plugin API for libv4l" to the
schedule, see the mail I just send. This actually is one of the main
reasons for me to come to the summit.

Thanks & Regards,

Hans


On 05/23/2010 12:36 PM, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This is a tentative agenda for the Helsinki mini-summit on June 14-16.
>
> Please reply to this thread if you have comments or want to add topics.
>
> The overall layout of the summit is to use the first day to go through all
> topics and either come to a conclusion quickly for the 'simple' topics, or
> discuss enough so that everyone understands the problem for the more complex
> issues.
>
> The second day will be used for in-depth discussions on those complex topics
> and on the third day we will go through all topics again and translate the
> discussions into something concrete like a time-line, action items, etc.
>
> We have a lot to discuss, so we may have to split the second day into two
> 'tracks', each discussing different topics. I hope it is not needed, but I
> fear we may have no choice. If we do split up, then one track will touch on
> the videobuf-related topics and the other on the remaining topics.
>
> The first day will also feature a few short presentations on various topics.
> Presentations shouldn't be longer than, say, 10 minutes. These presentations
> are meant to get everyone up to speed quickly.
>
> After each topic I've put the names of the main developers active in that area.
> If you see your name, then make sure you know the status of that topic so you
> can explain it to everyone else. If I think it warrants a presentation, then I
> will mention that. Of course, if you disagree, or want/don't want to do a
> presentation then just say so. It's a tentative agenda only.
>
> The topics below are in no particular order except for the first one. I am
> very pleased that Qualcomm has joined this project so I think it would be
> nice to start the meeting off with a presentation on their HW architecture.
>
> 1) Presentation on the Qualcomm video hw architecture. Most of us have no
>     experience with Qualcomm hardware, so I've asked Jeff Zhong to give a short
>     overview of their video hardware.
>
> 2) Removal of V4L1: status of driver conversion in the kernel, status of
>     moving v4l1->v4l2 conversion into libv4l1. What needs to be done, when
>     will it be done and who will do it. Driver conversion: Hans Verkuil,
>     libv4l1 conversion: Hans de Goede.
>
> 3) videobuf/videobuf2: what are the shortcomings, what are the requirements for
>     a 'proper' videobuf implementation, can the existing videobuf be fixed or do
>     we need a videobuf2. If the latter, what would be needed to convert existing
>     drivers over to a videobuf2. Laurent Pinchart and Pawel Osciak. This I'm sure
>     requires a presentation.
>
> 4) Multi-planar support. Pawel Osciak.
>
> 5) Media Controller Roadmap. Laurent Pinchart. This probably warrants a short
>     presentation.
>
> 6) TO DO list regarding V4L2 core framework including the new control framework.
>     Hans Verkuil. Will be a presentation.
>
> 7) Status of the Texas Instruments drivers: omapX (Hiremath Vaibhav) and DMxxxx
>     (Sergio Aguirre). Probably should be a short presentation.
>
> 8) soc-camera status. Particularly with regards to the remaining soc-camera
>     dependencies in sensor drivers. Guennadi Liakhovetski.
>
> 9) Driver compliance. We need a framework for V4L2 driver compliance. Hans
>     Verkuil.
>
> 10) Discuss list of 'reference' programs to test against. Mauro?
>
> 11) Adopting old V4L1 programs and converting to V4L2. Hans de Goede?
>
> 12) Status of intel drivers. Xiaolin Zhang.
>
> It is my understanding that we will also have X11 and gstreamer experts on hand.
> Topics relating to that are welcome.
>
> During the memory handling brainstorming session earlier this year we also
> touched on creating some sort of a generic buffer model allowing for easy
> exchange between v4l buffers, framebuffers, texture buffers, etc. It is my
> opinion that we should not discuss this in Helsinki. The list of topics is
> already quite long and I think it is too early to start working on that. We
> probably need another brainstorming session first in order to come up with
> a reasonable proposal.
>
> Comments? Topics I missed?
>
> Regards,
>
> 	Hans
>