Dominique Dumont wrote: > Kenneth Aafl?y <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > >>I've moved the card specific bttv cruft out of the dst frontend module, >>so that it can be moved to the other frontends. >> >>Made bt878.c be part of the dvb-bt8xx-pci driver, since there are no other >>users of this module, at least as far as I know. >> >>If no-one objects, I'll put it in cvs for testing. > > > I'm too new to btxxx to know whether this code reorganisation makes > sense or not and I will not comment on the technical aspect of your > patch. > Kenneth, the dst code i am rewriting is quite heavily changing at the moment, and there are quite some changes to what exactly is in the current dst module.. The entry point for the dst, dst_ca module is in the dvb-bt8xx module, even for the new modules that i am working on.. Removing that/and or reorganising that part would be quite difficult, and possibly lead to abandon the development what i have already done in that area.. > On my side, I'm working hard with Manu to get de-scrambling working on > Twinhan cards. Making such change right now will make our work much > harder as we do not have yet a fully working prototype. As part of > this work, Manu is also performing some kind of reorganisation in the > dst files. So your patch will clash badly with Manu's work. > It is really true that so much effort has gone into getting the dst module to work at least to quite some extent.. And such a large change would possibly would lead to an extreme large workload at this point time, which cannot be done considering so much additional work has to go into the various dst based cards, since being a combo driver. Without all that work, the dst module will look like a standard FTA based card only.. I mean it would be extremely hard to get the features of the hardware into driver.. I know you meant well by proposing this change but I'm afraid that the impact are too large to ignore. Feel free to come back later, if you have other idea to make bt8xx structure more clear. Manu
