Re: [RFC] What are the goals for the architecture of an in-kernelIR system?

[Gerd Hoffmann]

On 12/01/09 12:49, Andy Walls wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 11:46 +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> > Once lirc_dev is merged you can easily fix this:  You'll have *one*
> > driver which supports *both* evdev and lirc interfaces.  If lircd opens
> > the lirc interface raw data will be sent there, keystrokes come in via
> > uinput.  Otherwise keystrokes are send directly via evdev.  Problem solved.
>
> This will be kind of strange for lirc_zilog (aka lirc_pvr150).  It
> supports IR transmit on the PVR-150, HVR-1600, and HD-PVR.  I don't know
> if transmit is raw pulse timings, but I'm sure the unit provides codes
> on receive.  Occasionally blocks of "boot data" need to be programmed
> into the transmitter side.  I suspect lirc_zilog will likely need
> rework....

Well, for IR *output* it doesn't make sense to disable evdev.  One more 
reason which indicates it probaably is better to introduce a ioctl to 
disable evdev reporting.  lircd will probably turn it off, especially 
when sending data to uevent.  debug tools might not, likewise apps 
sending IR.

> >   so killing the in-kernel IR limits to make ir-kbd-i2c
>                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >        being on par with lirc_i2c might be more useful in this case.
>
> I didn't quite understand that.  Can you provide a little more info?

Such as throwing away the address part of rc5 codes ...

cheers,
  Gerd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/