From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mailrelay012.isp.belgacom.be (mailrelay012.isp.belgacom.be [195.238.6.179]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A2E4DE2AC for ; Wed, 31 Oct 2007 03:43:28 +1100 (EST) From: Laurent Pinchart To: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org Subject: Re: videobuf Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 17:43:16 +0100 References: <1193758138.4606.7.camel@PisteOff> In-Reply-To: <1193758138.4606.7.camel@PisteOff> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart20238222.2pi5z5mQ3G"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Message-Id: <200710301743.18580.laurentp@cse-semaphore.com> List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --nextPart20238222.2pi5z5mQ3G Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Tuesday 30 October 2007 16:28, Robert Woodworth wrote: > I'm working on building a v4l2 driver for an FPGA module on a Xilinx > Virtex4 PPC. > > Question: > Why does the v4l2 videobuf *depend* on PCI? Historical reasons I guess. The videobuf module has been designed for PCI=20 hardware (bttv if I'm not mistaken). Now that other, non-PCI devices would= =20 benefit from videobuf, PCI-specific support is being moved to a separate=20 module. Search the video4linux mailing list archive for discussions about videobuf= =20 cleanup. You can get the latest source tree at www.linuxtv.org. Best regards, =2D-=20 Laurent Pinchart CSE Semaphore Belgium Chauss=E9e de Bruxelles, 732A B-1410 Waterloo Belgium T +32 (2) 387 42 59 =46 +32 (2) 387 42 75 --nextPart20238222.2pi5z5mQ3G Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBHJ18m8y9gWxC9vpcRArdXAJ4kuvlJ7GGEkzEiiMlUOk2JNzX0iQCeJVVc svHtWqZm1H/SfM1mnW9Mbks= =UmiR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart20238222.2pi5z5mQ3G--