[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <85cf0892-68d4-560e-58df-874148d82143@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 17:27:10 +0200
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To: Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>, linux-media@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@....fi>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@...il.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [media] v4l2-core: Fine-tuning for some function implementations
>> 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists