From owner-freebsd-multimedia Fri Mar 21 13:00:15 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA12917 for multimedia-outgoing; Fri, 21 Mar 1997 13:00:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from whizzo.transsys.com (whizzo.TransSys.COM [144.202.42.10]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA12909 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 1997 13:00:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.transsys.com (localhost.transsys.com [127.0.0.1]) by whizzo.transsys.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA08668; Fri, 21 Mar 1997 16:00:04 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199703212100.QAA08668@whizzo.transsys.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96 To: Amancio Hasty cc: Steve Passe , Michael Petry , multimedia@freebsd.org From: "Louis A. Mamakos" Subject: Re: Continquous Memory vs Virtual Memory References: <199703211957.LAA01154@rah.star-gate.com> In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 21 Mar 1997 11:57:38 PST." <199703211957.LAA01154@rah.star-gate.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1997 16:00:04 -0500 Sender: owner-multimedia@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk While we're making the software which builds the channel programs, er, RISC programs most complicated, we could add in support for user specified clipping regions. I think there's some code which could be swiped from the bttv program which does some of that. As it is, the bttv program computes the RISC program in user space, and then shoves it into the kernel; this seems like the wrong division of labor and makes it more difficult to control what memory gets stomped on. You wouldn't want a video capture pointed at the effective UID field of the "u" area, would you? louie