lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:36:55 -0800
From:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:	Scott Smedley <ss@....gov.au>
Cc:	Marin Mitov <mitov@...p.bas.bg>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Yet another dt3155 driver for drivers/staging

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 12:03:36PM +1100, Scott Smedley wrote:
> Hi Greg & Marin,
> 
> > > Scott, any comparison between the two of them as to which one actually
> > > works better?
> 
> I'd be interested in Marin's opinion as he appears to have used both
> drivers extensively.
> 
> I'd like a userspace program to actually try out Marin's driver, but
> I can still make some general comments:
> 
> Things I like about Marin's driver:
> - It is only ~1/3rd the size. (by counting new lines)
> - The code is much neater.
> - It can acquire frames at 25 fps (real-time), according to Marin.
> - At least 1 person with intimate knowledge of the code seems keen to
>   maintain it.
> 
> Things I like about the sourceforge (SF) driver:
> - It works in CCIR mode (768x576) or 640x480 mode.
> - It is well tested.
> - It works with most kernel versions. ie. 2.2, 2.4, & 2.6. (mostly)
> - It works with multiple boards.
> - The code is moderately well commented.
> - It includes simple (user space) example programs.
> 
> 
> Clearly each driver has strengths over the other.
> 
> It would probably be easier to upgrade Marin's driver to match the
> strengths of the SF driver than the other way around. The only
> difficulty might be in making Marin's driver work with older kernel
> versions. IMO, that's probably an acceptable sacrifice to make. (For
> users of legacy systems, we could point them to the (unmaintained)
> driver on SF.)

We don't need to worry about older kernel versions from here on out.
That will make the one in the staging tree smaller as well, as the
compatibility code will soon be deleted.

So that leaves the functionality issues.   Is the only difference that
one can capture faster than the other?  They should be using the v4l
apis so userspace shouldn't be a difference either, right?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ