Re: [RFC] Should we create a raw input interface for IR's ? - Was:Re: [PATCH 1/3 v2] lirc core device driver infrastructure

[Jarod Wilson]

On 11/26/2009 08:54 AM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Jarod Wilson wrote:
> > On Nov 23, 2009, at 7:53 PM, Andy Walls wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 2009-11-23 at 22:11 +0100, Christoph Bartelmus wrote:
> > ...
> > > I generally don't understand the LIRC aversion I perceive in this thread
> > > (maybe I just have a skewed perception).  Aside for a video card's
> > > default remote setup, the suggestions so far don't strike me as any
> > > simpler for the end user than LIRC -- maybe I'm just used to LIRC.  LIRC
> > > already works for both transmit and receive and has existing support in
> > > applications such as MythTV and mplayer.
> >
> > There's one gripe I agree with, and that is that its still not plug-n-play.
> > Something where udev auto-loads a sane default remote config for say,
> > mceusb transceivers, and the stock mce remote Just Works would be nice,
> > but auto-config is mostly out the window the second you involve transmitters
> > and universal remotes anyway.
>
> For several devices, an udev rule that auto-loads a sane default keymap does work.
> Of course, this won't cover 100% of the usages, and I lirc is a very good way
> of covering the holes.
>
> > But outside of that, I think objections are largely philosophical --
> > in a nutshell, the kernel has an input layer, remotes are input devices,
> > and lirc doesn't conform to input layer standards.
>
> Yes. I think this is mainly the issue.
>
> The other issue is how to migrate the existing drivers to a new API without
> causing regressions. If we decide that IR's that receive raw pulse/code
> should use the raw input interface, this means that a large task force will be
> needed to convert the existing drivers to use it.

Aversion to regression is definitely a major concern. And why I'm liking 
the idea of a hybrid approach, at least initially.

> What do you think of adding lirc at staging while we discuss/improve the API's and lircd
> support for the input event interface? Do you think this would work?

Sure, I don't see why not. And I've got another dozen or so drivers to 
follow those first three... :)

--
Jarod Wilson
jarod@xxxxxxxxxxxx
--
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/