[Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH 0/3] drm driver for baytrail's vxd392

[Jiang, Fei]

The reason why we use DRM interface is mainly we want to use GEM for video memory manager.

Thanks,
Fei
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Clark [mailto:robdclark at gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 2:43 AM
To: Thierry Reding
Cc: Kelley, Sean V; Vetter, Daniel; intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org; DRI mailing list; Jiang, Fei
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH 0/3] drm driver for baytrail's vxd392

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 4:13 AM, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding at gmail.com> wrote:
> Finally, if this IP block is a VP8 video decoding engine only, I'm not 
> sure DRM is the best subsystem for it. Traditionally video decoding 
> has been done primarily in V4L2. I'm not sure that's the best fit 
> given that it was originally designed for video capturing, but they've 
> evolved some infrastructure to deal with encoding/decoding, whereas we 
> have nothing like that at all in DRM.

v4l maybe works for some vid dec/enc hw if the hw does enough for you.. the common ioctl approach might work for some hw, but I think not really all.  For the same reason we don't try to standardize the 3d/2d cmd submission ioctls across drivers..

BR,
-R