[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201106271814.36251.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 18:14:35 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...hat.com>
Cc: Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@....fi>,
Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [media] v4l2 core: return -ENOIOCTLCMD if an ioctl doesn't exist
On Monday 27 June 2011, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > The point is that the spec can easily be improved to make such 'NOP' operations
> > explicit, or to require that if a capability is present, then the corresponding
> > ioctl(s) must also be present. Things like that are easy to verify as well with
> > v4l2-compliance.
>
> We currently have more than 64 ioctl's. Adding a capability bit for each doesn't
> seem the right thing to do. Ok, some could be grouped, but, even so, there are
> drivers that implement the VIDIOC_G, but doesn't implement the corresponding VIDIO_S.
> So, I think we don't have enough available bits for doing that.
It shouldn't be too hard to do an ioctl command that returns a le_bitmask with the
ioctl command number as an index (0 to 91, currently), and the bit set for each
command that has the corresponding v4l2_ioctl_ops member filled for the device.
That would be an obvious way to query the operations, but I don't know if it's
useful.
Arnd
--
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