Allwinner SDK 2.0 and h.264 support

[jons...@gmail.com]

I just got a hold of the Allwinner STB SDK 2.0 for A20. There are
major improvements to their h2.64 encoder blob in it. Old blob was
almost unusable. This one seems to working much better.

Now that they have fixed h.264 encoding Skype is using the hardware
encoder instead of reverting to software VP8 encode. You can get
720P/1080P instead of only VGA on Skype.

Not sure about licenses and how to get this into a form sunxi can use.

--
Jon Smirl
jons...@gmail.com

[Manuel Braga]

Is newer than this?
http://dl.cubieboard.org/software/a20-cubieboard/android/android-SDK.zip

--

[jons...@gmail.com]

When is that from? STB SDK 2.0 has been out about 30 days now. 

It is using kernel 3.4.39

--

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "linux-sunxi" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
Jon Smirl
jons...@gmail.com

[Manuel Braga]

On Fri, 18 Apr 2014 14:44:44 -0400 "jons...@gmail.com"
<jons...@gmail.com> wrote:
> When is that from? STB SDK 2.0 has been out about 30 days now.
>
> It is using kernel 3.4.39

That file has a server date of 17 Jan 1014.
But this SDKs are only useful if there have anything new, from what we
current have.



This is situation ridicule, Allwinner should make this available to us.
And not we have to randomly wait for one customer to arrive.

[Rosimildo DaSilva]

I think making this available is one simple step that AW simply fails to do.
If it is out there, some one may open some file and find something new on it.

R

[jons...@gmail.com]

On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Rosimildo DaSilva <rosi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think making this available is one simple step that AW simply fails to do.
> If it is out there, some one may open some file and find something new on
> it.

I have had discussions with their marketing people about this. They
just do really understand open source concepts. I pushed for them to
join Linaro which they have done. Hopefully the Linaro people will
sort them out on Open Source.

What is the kernel rev in that Cubieboard download? I don't have
enough free disk space to unpack it.

> R
>
> On Thursday, April 17, 2014 3:06:02 PM UTC-5, Jon Smirl wrote:
>>
>> I just got a hold of the Allwinner STB SDK 2.0 for A20. There are
>> major improvements to their h2.64 encoder blob in it. Old blob was
>> almost unusable. This one seems to working much better.
>>
>> Now that they have fixed h.264 encoding Skype is using the hardware
>> encoder instead of reverting to software VP8 encode. You can get
>> 720P/1080P instead of only VGA on Skype.
>>
>> Not sure about licenses and how to get this into a form sunxi can use.
>>
>> --
>> Jon Smirl
>> jons...@gmail.com
>

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "linux-sunxi" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to linux-sunxi...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



--

Jon Smirl
jons...@gmail.com

[jons...@gmail.com]

On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 7:04 AM, Manuel Braga <mul....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Apr 2014 14:44:44 -0400 "jons...@gmail.com"
> <jons...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> When is that from? STB SDK 2.0 has been out about 30 days now.
>>
>> It is using kernel 3.4.39
>
> That file has a server date of 17 Jan 1014.
> But this SDKs are only useful if there have anything new, from what we
> current have.
>
>
>
> This is situation ridicule, Allwinner should make this available to us.
> And not we have to randomly wait for one customer to arrive.

Allwinner made it available to their OEM customers. I then got it out
of our OEM manufacturer.

Allwinner also doesn't understand that the people building our board
and buying the chips (which is who they gave the SDK to) and not the
people that are writing the software for the product and not the same
company.

Jon Smirl
jons...@gmail.com

[Rosimildo DaSilva]

On Saturday, April 19, 2014 11:00:27 AM UTC-5, Jon Smirl wrote:

On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Rosimildo DaSilva <rosi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think making this available is one simple step that AW simply fails to do.
> If it is out there, some one may open some file and find something new on
> it.

I have had discussions with their marketing people about this. They
just do really understand open source concepts.  I pushed for them to
join Linaro which they have done. Hopefully the Linaro people will
sort them out on Open Source.

I think their Linaro move is just useless. They should hire an "Open Source" evangelist, someone like many of this list.

Someone that could "read the community" needs and bring them to us, whenever possible. This community does a lot

more, or already did, of what Linaro can ever do.

 

What is the kernel rev in that Cubieboard download? I don't have
enough free disk space to unpack it.

Some version of 3.4, I think 3.4.69

[jons...@gmail.com]

On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Rosimildo DaSilva <rosi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Saturday, April 19, 2014 11:00:27 AM UTC-5, Jon Smirl wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Rosimildo DaSilva <rosi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > I think making this available is one simple step that AW simply fails to
>> > do.
>> > If it is out there, some one may open some file and find something new
>> > on
>> > it.
>>
>> I have had discussions with their marketing people about this. They
>> just do really understand open source concepts. I pushed for them to
>> join Linaro which they have done. Hopefully the Linaro people will
>> sort them out on Open Source.
>
>
> I think their Linaro move is just useless. They should hire an "Open Source"

Won't be useless if Allwinner chips become part of the standard Linaro
build. Then we'd get new, fully tested system releases each quarter
including most of the source.

[Rosimildo DaSilva]

On Sunday, April 20, 2014 8:12:36 AM UTC-5, Jon Smirl wrote:

On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Rosimildo DaSilva <rosi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Saturday, April 19, 2014 11:00:27 AM UTC-5, Jon Smirl wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Rosimildo DaSilva <rosi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > I think making this available is one simple step that AW simply fails to
>> > do.
>> > If it is out there, some one may open some file and find something new
>> > on
>> > it.
>>
>> I have had discussions with their marketing people about this. They
>> just do really understand open source concepts.  I pushed for them to
>> join Linaro which they have done. Hopefully the Linaro people will
>> sort them out on Open Source.
>
>
> I think their Linaro move is just useless. They should hire an "Open Source"

Won't be useless if Allwinner chips become part of the standard Linaro
build. Then we'd get new, fully tested system releases each quarter
including most of the source.

Let's hope so. When I said "useless", I meant "less efficient". Having a direct link between open source and the company would make easier for both ends

to improve where docs are missing,  where there is lacking drivers, etc.

Example, for the majority, the most important aspects of thise SOC's are mostly the Media capabilities:

 + Video processing

 + Graphics processing

 + Camera's interfaces and drivers

 + Display capabilities and drivers...

There are areas where everything is really bad. Drivers are terrible, and documentation is nearly non-existent.

You've seen that, and you have been working with them to make this easier... but there are still many hurdles.

 

Someone with some reasonable skills to talk to them to be ahead of the game on these area would make things a lot better.... but I guess the darkness is the preferable stage...

R

[Koen Kooi]

Op 20 apr. 2014, om 15:12 heeft jons...@gmail.com het volgende geschreven:

> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Rosimildo DaSilva <rosi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Saturday, April 19, 2014 11:00:27 AM UTC-5, Jon Smirl wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Rosimildo DaSilva <rosi...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> I think making this available is one simple step that AW simply fails to
>>>> do.
>>>> If it is out there, some one may open some file and find something new
>>>> on
>>>> it.
>>>
>>> I have had discussions with their marketing people about this. They
>>> just do really understand open source concepts. I pushed for them to
>>> join Linaro which they have done. Hopefully the Linaro people will
>>> sort them out on Open Source.
>>
>>
>> I think their Linaro move is just useless. They should hire an "Open Source"
>
> Won't be useless if Allwinner chips become part of the standard Linaro
> build. Then we'd get new, fully tested system releases each quarter
> including most of the source.

They joined the linaro home group at pretty much the lowest tier. So no landing team for kernel changes, no bootloader work, no allwinner based boards for 'standard builds' (whatever those are). Linaro does what the members tell them to do and pay for, so if Allwinner only cares about being able to use the digital home SDK, they will get exactly that and only that.
I work for linaro so I won't say it's what Allwinner is doing is 'useless', but as far as benefits for the linux-sunxi community: virtually none.

And take a look at the builds we do: http://releases.linaro.org/14.03 , you'll see only a handful of boards. Cross-reference the boards present there with the member list and you'll see a few silicon vendors are missing. Again, linaro does what members tell them to do, so work with allwinner to drive the change you want. Linaro is a magic bullet, but someone still has to load and fire the gun :)

regards,

Koen

[jons...@gmail.com]

On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Koen Kooi <ko...@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
>
> Op 20 apr. 2014, om 15:12 heeft jons...@gmail.com het volgende geschreven:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Rosimildo DaSilva <rosi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Saturday, April 19, 2014 11:00:27 AM UTC-5, Jon Smirl wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Rosimildo DaSilva <rosi...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> I think making this available is one simple step that AW simply fails to
>>>>> do.
>>>>> If it is out there, some one may open some file and find something new
>>>>> on
>>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>> I have had discussions with their marketing people about this. They
>>>> just do really understand open source concepts. I pushed for them to
>>>> join Linaro which they have done. Hopefully the Linaro people will
>>>> sort them out on Open Source.
>>>
>>>
>>> I think their Linaro move is just useless. They should hire an "Open Source"
>>
>> Won't be useless if Allwinner chips become part of the standard Linaro
>> build. Then we'd get new, fully tested system releases each quarter
>> including most of the source.
>
> They joined the linaro home group at pretty much the lowest tier. So no landing team for kernel changes, no bootloader work, no allwinner based boards for 'standard builds' (whatever those are). Linaro does what the members tell them to do and pay for, so if Allwinner only cares about being able to use the digital home SDK, they will get exactly that and only that.

Allwinner is unconvinced that Linaro will be of any use to them,
that's why they joined at the lowest tier. Maybe the Linaro team can
convince them of the value and get them to participate more fully.

Are they able to send employees to work at Linaro offices in their
tier? That would be a good way to train them on open source concepts.
In general Allwinner seems to be cooperative, they just need to be led
down the right path. From what I know it is their marketing group that
joined, some effort will need to be made to get their engineering
group involved.

Allwinner's software release practices are terrible. My hope was that
their association with Linaro would teach them how to do proper
releases.

BTW - The graphics drivers are owned by ARM, Inc. That is who is
keeping them closed, Allwinner has no control over this.

As for the video encoder/decoder it seems to me like they partially
own it; I can't get a clear answer out of them. If it is partially
owned, all owners would need to cooperate on open sourcing the
drivers.

As for the camera drivers. They are somewhat documented but the
English documentation is poor. You are better off looking at the
driver code. I don't think they are trying to keep it closed, it is
more a problem of poor documentation. I suspect the Chinese language
documentation for it is much better.