FYI: v4l-linuxulator support in FreeBSD-current now

[Alexander Leidinger]

Quoting Juergen Lock <nox at jelal.kn-bremen.de> (from Tue, 11 Jan 2011  
23:20:55 +0100):

>  But anyway if you want to merge this version as it is now you want
> it at least to return errors for the ioctls it doesn't translate,
> or only do that on amd64.
>
>  (Or maybe I'll look at this over the weekend myself but I can't
> promise anything... :)

So if it is just two ioctl's to cover: Andrew, do your applications  
still work  when those ioctl's return ENOSYS or an error (whatever is  
more sensible in this case)? If yes, I would not complain if those  
ioctl's would return ENOSYS (and do some sensible rate limited logging  
explaining the issue) in the linux32 on amd64 case but work on i386  
(in case nobody has the time to make them work correctly in linux32 on  
amd64).

One question still remains, why is the bitswap required? Is it really  
that linux uses a different order than FreeBSD and all the other code  
does it somehow implicitely (and I didn't notice it), or is there  
something else going on? IMO this is an important question to answer  
before a commit.

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
A diplomat is a man who can convince his
wife she'd look stout in a fur coat.

http://www.Leidinger.net    Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org       netchild @ FreeBSD.org  : PGP ID = 72077137