Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 0/1] cameraif: add ABI for para-virtual camera

[Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 10:15:08AM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 12/03/2019 10:07, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>>> On 12.03.19 at 09:48, <jgross@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> On 12/03/2019 09:19, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
> >>> From: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@xxxxxxxx>
> >>>
> >>> Hello!
> >>>
> >>> At the moment Xen [1] already supports some virtual multimedia
> >>> features [2] such as virtual display, sound. It supports keyboards,
> >>> pointers and multi-touch devices all allowing Xen to be used in
> >>> automotive appliances, In-Vehicle Infotainment (IVI) systems
> >>> and many more.
> >>>
> >>> Frontend implementation is available at [3] and the corresponding
> >>> backend at [4]. These are work in progress, but frontend already
> >>> passes v4l2-compliance test for V4L2 drivers. libxl preliminary
> >>> changes are available at [5].
> >>>
> >>> This work adds a new Xen para-virtualized protocol for a virtual
> >>> camera device which extends multimedia capabilities of Xen even
> >>> farther: video conferencing, IVI, high definition maps etc.
> >>>
> >>> The initial goal is to support most needed functionality with the
> >>> final idea to make it possible to extend the protocol if need be:
> >>>
> >>> 1. Provide means for base virtual device configuration:
> >>>  - pixel formats
> >>>  - resolutions
> >>>  - frame rates
> >>> 2. Support basic camera controls:
> >>>  - contrast
> >>>  - brightness
> >>>  - hue
> >>>  - saturation
> >>> 3. Support streaming control
> >>
> >> So since the first post in July 2018 there has been no reaction from
> >> Konrad to this interface. I guess he has plenty of other things to do.
> > 
> > Having gone through all the versions' threads (just their titles) I can't
> > find any explicit ping to him. Yes, five versions should have been
> > enough to draw attention, but then again this may have indicated to
> > him that things are still too much in flux.
> > 
> >> Maybe it would be a good idea to add someone else as a maintainer for
> >> the "PUBLIC I/O INTERFACES AND PV DRIVERS DESIGNS" section in
> >> MAINTAINERS to avoid such stalls in the future?
> > 
> > Well, iirc he had volunteered himself for that role, so I guess the
> > preferred action in such a case would be for him to also step back if
> > his other duties no longer permit him fulfilling the maintainer role here.
> > Without the specific MAINTAINERS entry, as in the old days, THE
> > REST would assume responsibility again, which personally I'd prefer
> > over adding a second individual to the section. Unless someone else
> > (like you) volunteered again.
> 
> I wouldn't mind doing that. Unless someone thinks me being one of the
> main consumers of those interfaces on the Linux side would raise a
> conflict.

I don't see a problem with you having that role. :-)

Wei.

> 
> 
> Juergen

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel