2012-07-19, 14:44
So licensing would be the real reason why they would never open up programming documentation to their core's you recon? I wonder how much of that core is actually decoding video and how much is assisting on such task.
E.g. you feed a h264 bitstream to libcedarx, does it do some small householding and feed the entire bitstream to the VPU? Unlikely. More logical and plausible is that libcedarx does some bits of the decoding and passes several steps of the decoding onto the VPU. And that's where the licensing issues come into play then, right? So releasing programming documentation allows ffmpeg/libavcodec etc to hook into the VPU and bypassing any licensing issues. Right?
Also, if licensing is such a huge issue, how has broadcom bypassed this? A bcm970012 can be had for 11 USD from Ebay ... Their libraries would be thus tainted with 'warning licensing problems'?
As for Mali, yes, libGL.so etc are supplied by arm/mali/whoknows who. Much preferred however is to have this opensource, hence where the limaproject comes in
E.g. you feed a h264 bitstream to libcedarx, does it do some small householding and feed the entire bitstream to the VPU? Unlikely. More logical and plausible is that libcedarx does some bits of the decoding and passes several steps of the decoding onto the VPU. And that's where the licensing issues come into play then, right? So releasing programming documentation allows ffmpeg/libavcodec etc to hook into the VPU and bypassing any licensing issues. Right?
Also, if licensing is such a huge issue, how has broadcom bypassed this? A bcm970012 can be had for 11 USD from Ebay ... Their libraries would be thus tainted with 'warning licensing problems'?
As for Mali, yes, libGL.so etc are supplied by arm/mali/whoknows who. Much preferred however is to have this opensource, hence where the limaproject comes in
