Synopsis
========
-.. cpp:function:: int ioctl( int fd, int request, struct v4l2_frmivalenum *argp )
+.. c:function:: int ioctl( int fd, VIDIOC_ENUM_FRAMEINTERVALS, struct v4l2_frmivalenum *argp )
+ :name: VIDIOC_ENUM_FRAMEINTERVALS
Arguments
``fd``
File descriptor returned by :ref:`open() <func-open>`.
-``request``
- VIDIOC_ENUM_FRAMEINTERVALS
-
``argp``
- Pointer to a struct :ref:`v4l2_frmivalenum <v4l2-frmivalenum>`
+ Pointer to a struct :c:type:`v4l2_frmivalenum`
structure that contains a pixel format and size and receives a frame
interval.
does it make sense to increase the index value to receive more frame
intervals.
-.. note:: The order in which the frame intervals are returned has no
+.. note::
+
+ The order in which the frame intervals are returned has no
special meaning. In particular does it not say anything about potential
default frame intervals.
application should zero out all members except for the *IN* fields.
-.. _v4l2-frmival-stepwise:
+.. c:type:: v4l2_frmival_stepwise
+
+.. tabularcolumns:: |p{4.4cm}|p{4.4cm}|p{8.7cm}|
.. flat-table:: struct v4l2_frmival_stepwise
:header-rows: 0
- .. row 1
- - struct :ref:`v4l2_fract <v4l2-fract>`
+ - struct :c:type:`v4l2_fract`
- ``min``
- .. row 2
- - struct :ref:`v4l2_fract <v4l2-fract>`
+ - struct :c:type:`v4l2_fract`
- ``max``
- .. row 3
- - struct :ref:`v4l2_fract <v4l2-fract>`
+ - struct :c:type:`v4l2_fract`
- ``step``
-.. _v4l2-frmivalenum:
+.. c:type:: v4l2_frmivalenum
.. flat-table:: struct v4l2_frmivalenum
:header-rows: 0
- .. row 7
-
- - struct :ref:`v4l2_fract <v4l2-fract>`
+ - struct :c:type:`v4l2_fract`
- ``discrete``
- .. row 8
-
- - struct :ref:`v4l2_frmival_stepwise <v4l2-frmival-stepwise>`
+ - struct :c:type:`v4l2_frmival_stepwise`
- ``stepwise``
=====
-.. _v4l2-frmivaltypes:
+.. c:type:: v4l2_frmivaltypes
+
+.. tabularcolumns:: |p{6.6cm}|p{2.2cm}|p{8.7cm}|
.. flat-table:: enum v4l2_frmivaltypes
:header-rows: 0