Trent Piepho wrote: > On Tue, 1 May 2007, Simon Arlott wrote: >> On 30/04/07 22:17, Markus Rechberger wrote: >>> From my side I do not see any problem with that patch, if someone else >>> has a problem with it please state out the reason. >> I have no problem with the patch since it has nothing to do with my DVB >> card but you're only encouraging Uwe to be abusive since it seems to >> help get him what he wants: > > I've been aware of the problem with dst not fully using the dvb customization > systems(*) for a long time. It came up when dvb_attach() et al were first > being integrated, well before any rejected patches or strongly worded emails > or whatever from certain people that I'm aware of. > Well, your understanding of the device is quite limited and hence your comments and patches. The DST as it refers to is an embedded system a x86 Compatible RISC core [1] running at 20Mhz with 4MB Flash and 1MB RAM. The device has it's own IO and 2 DMA channels. What we have is a PQFP device This is the case in most cases. On some cheaper cards the embedded system is replaced by an 8 bit host microcontroller, to cut down costs where all the features are not required for a specific model Additionally this embedded system has a fast shovelling engine for the MPEG2 TS routing in between the This embedded system is connected to an actual (1) DVB frontend [2] (2) DVB CA interface [3] (3) Analog tuner (4) Audio interfaces These features are not the characteristics of a DVB Frontend. Here there is a DVB frontend like the normal ones which is hidden behind another pseudo bridge (So you don't have *any* access to the frontend at large) It is not necessary that *all* the dst cards (there are around ~15 different variants of the same) do have the very same feature set. It does support DVB-S/DSS/DVB-C/DVB-T/ATSC depending on the cards. In fact it is a combo driver supporting the entire devices using a common command set In such a case it has more characteristics of the PCI bridge and in fact heavily tied to it and has it's own advantages. > I saw some discussion about dst by Markus, Mauro, and Andrew Morton, and since > I already know about the issues here, I felt I should post a patch for them > any other reasonable developers who might spend time on this. > I would think that it would be *extremely* rude for a person to send in patches for a device that which you don't understand at all, when it is for limiting the capability of the said device > If there is an abusive person, I'm not going to let it affect my behavior. > You lose if you let them influence your decisions one way, or influence them > another way. > > > (*) There are two customization/dependency control systems in DVB. One is > dvb_attach(), the other is DVB_FE_CUSTOMISE. They are not two entirely > separate systems, but overlap in their design a great deal. > Here we have the attach method attaching different objects, but basically it can be handled for the frontend devices only (and that too that share a very common trait, in this case, frontends are coupled using the i2c bus) and not for other devices. Situation changes when you use another interface such as SPI, where the interface is not well defined. In the DVB OO concept we have, where the objects are at different levels, the basic concept is that an object is indeed a smaller subset, depending on the level that which it pertains to. In such a case the frontend is limited to do just frontend related operations. There could be other ways that things can be done maybe the DVB API can be redone to have all DVB operations through the frontend alone. But that is not at all decent way of doing it. > The significant part, common to both, is the overall design of the driver > framework. DVB uses what I would describe as an object oriented system. A > driver for a certain type of hardware exports a single attach function, which > returns an object for one instance of that hardware. All control of that > hardware is done via methods defined in this object. There is typical > hierarchy, where an 'adapter' object will contain a 'frontend' object which > will contain a 'tuner' object. Of course hardware designers are not > constrained by the software frameworks we create, so sometimes it's more > complex (e.g., dst). It is a bit more complex than you think. You can imagine the entire DVB-CORE along with proprietory vendor specific tuning algorithms (on all devices, specific to the hardware onbaord. Algorithms do change from slight change of hardware such as demodulators and or CA interface stacks) on CA devices it has an onboard EN50221 CA stack from SCM [4] called the Sunplus CI stack. On Hybrid DST devices they do feature in analog core support in there as well as Audio too on some cards. It is not a constraint as what you might think, as the DST is complete hardware solution of the interfaces that you are talking about. (There are 2 approaches, (1) do everything in hardware (2) do everything in software) there are merits and demerits equally to both the approaches. So here we are talking about 3 different subsystems DVB, V4L and ALSA. Currently the DST supports *only* DVB and that too it is limited. There is more to DVB than what you see in the DST as of now. Support for multiple delivery systems do not exists as of now (requires the multiproto DVB API patches) With these said, i wouldn't want to close the window for the dst to be a DVB frontend alone, as that's what you are trying to do > This design means the actual hard link between different drivers is limited to > each driver's single attach function (**). By breaking this one link, we can > control which drivers must be loaded or linked to only those necessary or > wanted. dvb_attach() and DVB_FE_CUSTOMISE are two different ways of > controlling these links. dvb_attach will have to go away for the DST. It doesn't work for the mentioned reasons that it is just pushing the device to a corner as a DVB frontend whereas it is not a DVB Frontend at all. [1] R8820 CPU core http://jusst.de/manu/misc/R8820-F19.pdf [2] DVB Fontend A DVB Frontend consists of a Demodulator (http://www.linuxtv.org/wiki/index.php/Demodulator) and a tuner [3] DVB CA interface A CA Interface consists of a CI slot (http://www.linuxtv.org/wiki/index.php/Common_Interface) and a CA module (http://www.linuxtv.org/wiki/index.php/CAM) [4] http://www.scmmicro.com/ _______________________________________________ linux-dvb mailing list linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
