[Arm-netbook] Any ARM SoC has Open-Source access to hardware video decoder ?

[Michael Zucchi]

On 02/07/12 22:30, lkcl luke wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 5:21 AM, Michael Zucchi<notzed at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> On 02/07/12 00:34, Alexey Eromenko wrote:
>>> While I agree that 3D is nice, the use-cases for it are limited.
>>> Much more needed is the VPU stuff (hardware video decoder), more than GPU (3D).
>>> Once any SoC will do VPU, it will become so much more useful...
>>
>> What's this obsession with video decoding?
>

>   this situation pisses me off.

I'm sure it does all of us.

But I don't have a copyright on the linux kernel, and if the kernel 
developers think tivoisation is ok (or wont change the license if the 
current one isn't sufficient to prevent it, and allow binary modules 
anyway), what place is it of mine to complain?

>   in order to correct this situation, it is *essential* to have a
> low-cost competitive SoC that has video decode.

Sorry I touched a nerve! :)

My intention was just to point out that 3d is just as important, not so 
much that video isn't.  I was also looking at it from the perspective of 
a user, not the mass-production-hardware one.

Although I don't see how having a soc with full source for the drivers 
will make much difference either, it could still just be tivoised or 
hidden if the kernel is linux - with the added bonus of further reduced 
software costs.  It still comes down to legalities which are either just 
ignored or loopholes in GPLv2 (or kernel developers interpretation 
thereof) which can be exploited.  Even if you have other protection 
mechanisms for your hardware, it wouldn't protect other hardware using 
the same soc.

  !Z