Chuck Ebbert wrote:
Jarod Wilson wrote:
Chris Brown wrote:
On 22/03/07, *Dave Jones* <davej@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:davej@xxxxxxxxxx>>
wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 11:15:32AM -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> What are we supposed to do when this kind of thing happens? It
appears that
> multiple drivers claim to support the same hardware.
Grr, this happens far too often. We have the same with for eg,
orinoco and hostap right now. The usual deal is that we either
just build the 'best' driver for that hardware, or if there's a case
where both drivers support the same hardware _and_ some hardware unique
to them, we nobble the pci table so that the crappier driver
doesn't load on that hardware.
As to which is the best one in this case.. I really don't know.
Or maybe this is a situation where it's valid to have both drivers
loaded?
We don't actually support that right now, but patches went to
linux-pci list
last week that should be showing up in GregKHs tree adding an
alternative
method for drivers to bind to a device in situations where it's
possible
for two drivers to drive different parts of the same chip.
(This case has been showing up more and more recently too..
agp vs edac, matroxfb vs lm_sensors,..)
Taking a look at:
http://lwn.net/Articles/212535/
which may be able to shed some light on the changes.
Yep.
Even with the
blackbird driver blacklisted, the v4l2 loads but the dvb driver does
not. It should be noted that the two co-exist peacefully when loaded but
something is preventing the latter from loading - perhaps because the
kernel "sees" the driver requirements as being satisfied by the v4l2 module?
In any case, in this instance it is just that the cx88-dvb driver is
failing to load as opposed to anything more sinister.
Interestingly enough, I was talking to one of the vl4-dvb maintainers
(Michael Krufky) on irc about this very driver two days ago. The
cx88-dvb driver is *supposed* to auto-load via a request_module() call
in cx8802. Similar for cx88-blackbird. Things broke when support for the
Hauppauge HVR1300 was added, because it actually needs *both* cx88-dvb
and cx88-blackbird. Upstream v4l-dvb has this fixed, verified by me from
20070302 snapshot cx88-dvb/cx8802 drivers.
So can they send a patch for -stable to fix it in 2.6.20?
Okay, patches are good to go for both cx88-dvb and dvb-bt8xx autoload
support. The cx88-dvb patch is a roll-up of three patches from upstream
v4l-dvb. I've successfully tested this patch atop 2.6.20 with a pcHDTV
HD-3000 card.
http://people.redhat.com/jwilson/misc/dvb-updates/linux-2.6-cx88-dvb-autoload.patch
The dvb-bt8xx patch is a newly-created patch by myself (with pointers
from Michael) that is essentially a clone of the cx88-dvb autoload bits.
It works flawlessly in my testing with a pcHDTV HD-2000 card. Its in
Michael's hands now, and he says he'll get it committed to the v4l-dvb
tree this afternoon.
http://people.redhat.com/jwilson/misc/dvb-updates/linux-2.6-cx88-dvb-autoload.patch
Semi-related to these patches is another cx88-dvb fix that we could
optionally add to fix some buffer issues on nxt200x-based cx88-dvb cards:
http://people.redhat.com/jwilson/misc/dvb-updates/linux-2.6-nxt200x-buffer.patch
All three apply cleanly to the current FC6 2.6.20 kernel tree, as
Patch30-32.
Lemme know if I can provide any further info!
--
Jarod Wilson
jwilson@xxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
