From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.12]:62416 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750778AbdIWP1t (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Sep 2017 11:27:49 -0400 Subject: Re: [media] v4l2-core: Fine-tuning for some function implementations To: Hans Verkuil , linux-media@vger.kernel.org Cc: Sakari Ailus , Dave Hansen , Jan Kara , Javier Martinez Canillas , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Lorenzo Stoakes , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Michal Hocko , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org References: <9268b60d-08ba-c64e-1848-f84679d64f80@users.sourceforge.net> <20161227115111.GN16630@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> <8241c145-03f4-6dd2-401e-7d251cd5d251@users.sourceforge.net> From: SF Markus Elfring Message-ID: <85cf0892-68d4-560e-58df-874148d82143@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 17:27:10 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: >> Will the software evolution be continued for related source files? >> Are there any update candidates left over in the directory “v4l2-core”? > > Sorry, I don't understand the question. I try to explain my view again. > We don't want to touch the videobuf-* files unless there is a very good reason. I hoped that my update suggestions could be good enough once more for this area. > That old videobuf framework is deprecated and the code is quite fragile > (i.e. easy to break things). How do you think about to move this stuff into a separate subdirectory so that it might become a bit easier to distinguish these software components? > Everything else in that directory is under continuous development. I am curious if there are still update candidates left over (also from my selection of change possibilities). Regards, Markus