I don't want to derail the underlying discussion at hand (although it strikes me as not everyone talking about the same thing), but I do want to just pick up on a particular point: Manu Abraham wrote: > for the average person, frontend = RF module, inclusive of the demod And if that is what the average person believes, then they would indeed be correct. (Although I have serious doubts that the average person knows what a frontend is ;) ) A Frontend is just an abstraction. In some cases a frontend can be described entirely by a NIM/RF module such as the LGH06xF (which is inclusive of the demodulator) or, in the case of older designs like the pcHDTV HD-2000 or DVICO FusionHDTV3 series, both the RF module AND the external demodulator comprise the frontend. > frontend = demod name (that's what we have currently), And that would technically be wrong ... although if it works into the coding framework, then so be it. > Tuner is unimportant in this case as it doesn't have much of ops. I'm not certain what you mean by "ops", but I gather that its minor role is what has lead to the project's definition of frontend to equal demod Lastly, as some food for thought -- we're already starting to see the move towards multi-purpose IC's. Examples: - Xceive 3028 tuner and analog demod; - ATI theater 650 analog demod, A/V decoder & mpeg encoder. It likely will be a few years yet, but pretty soon we WILL run into the case where the traditional frontend and "backend" components on the DTV devices merge into one IC. How then does one define the abstraction? At that point, the concept will only refer to the relevant processing stages carried out in that single IC. > With this it gives the bridge name, Generic name and the frontend > name, all in it's own relevant place and not in the frontend. it will > be just messing up the frontend to a state where it will be hopeless. > > for example: > bridge name = "Mantis PCI rev 1.0" > Generic name = "VP-1034" > frontend name = "MB86A16 DVB-S/DSS DC receiver" > > It additionally fixes some other issues as well, such as handling > bridge reset 's etc. Will this solution account for a single, multifunctional IC, as I have just described? Cheers. _______________________________________________ linux-dvb mailing list linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
