| title: | Re Correct way to do s ctrl ioctl taking int |
|
Em 27-06-2010 00:26, Devin Heitmueller escreveu:
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 9:34 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab
<mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
would do the trick. Yet, the application is broken, as it is considering a positive
return as an error. A positive code should never be considered as an error. So, we
need to fix v4l2-ctl as well (ok, returning 1 is wrong as well, as this is a non-v4l2
compliance in this case).
A strict interpretation of the spec would read that returning zero is
success, -1 is an well-formed error condition, and *ANYTHING* else is
a violation of the spec and an application used for testing compliance
should complain very loudly (which is exactly what it does).
In effect, the only patch I would consider valid for v4l2-ctl would be
one that makes the error even more LOUD than it already is.
It should output it as an API violation, not as a failure on setting the value.
Thats said, I think that a few ioctl calls used to return positive values under
certain special conditions. Not sure if this is a non-compliance or if the
API allows it.
Cheers,
Mauro
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at rel="nofollow" vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|
