I think most people know how the product should behave, including the NVIDIA people, but seeing why and how it is not behaving as it should depends on a lot more knowledge, and often actually the ability to reproduce the problem. Most of the NVIDIA people are in the USA, but like most companies, there are not enough people for the number of problems. It wouldn’t matter where they are though if they cannot reproduce the problem and can only guess.
What camera are you working with? If it isn’t one on the list of cameras they have access to, then everything is a guess. However, it doesn’t mean problems for that can’t be solved, but it does mean you will need a lot more information, and there is nothing anyone can do about that. Now imagine that your job was to build a driver for that camera, but you don’t have access to the actual camera…the level of difficulty suddenly goes up a lot. I suppose you could send such a camera to NVIDIA, and perhaps a custom carrier board for testing (though the carrier wouldn’t be important if it comes down to some standard interface, e.g., CSI). Is there a possibility you can send a matching model camera to NVIDIA (I personally lack camera experience and have no test equipment, not even an oscilloscope…mine died, whereas NVIDIA no doubt has some rather advanced test equipment)? That would dramatically aid seeing the problem. NVIDIA would no longer have to “imagine” the camera, they could literally put test equipment on it.
On the other hand, if you want to message me and point out some threads which are current questions, maybe I could see if I could compile an alternate question and format to post (you could private message me a list). You could look it over, and I could keep replying until we come up with a more detailed way of explaining the problems which could be answered. I can’t promise a lot as far as actual camera knowledge since I don’t work on cameras, but I’m betting I could come up with what is needed to actually ask in a way which could be more quickly answered.