Manu Abraham wrote: >> I'm not against mmap, I'm against using development resources for >> implementing it. I can't see the big show-stopper in this issue. >> So, seriously: Is there anybody here who *needs* this, based on his own >> experience? >> If yes, I'll might change my mind. > I think it would be nice to have it. Yes, it would be nice. But do you NEED it? Is it a show-stopper for you? Do you have a scenario which doesn't work because of THIS? >>> No, not throwing away anything, see my reply to Rainer. The newer >>> features will not be available with the older apps, that's all. You can >>> use the same drivers too. Backward compatibility is achieved by keeping >>> an additional set of ioctl's, so the old stuff will work as it is. >> Will older hardware drivers be compatible with a new dvb-core (more than >> maybe changing some identifiers)? > As it is, without any change. I think Johannes did the great job of > confusing people. Don't get personal. Unstable driver APIs are a huge issue for non-mainstream hardware. Let's do our best to keep devices without active maintainers supported. V4 would have killed them, so i only want to be sure that your "api updates" won't. >> My approach is to add a "DMX_ADD_PID" ioctl, similar to DMX_SET_FILTER. >> [...] > This sounds fine to me. Great. >> * "The current API doesn't allow you to do simple TS filters." >> >> Again, in http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-dvb/msg09258.html I came up >> with my solution, however people noted that this might break FF cards >> due. This can probably be avoided by using a better value for DMX_TAP_TS. >> >> Note that the dvb-core implementation is trivial, as hardware drivers >> are already supporting TS filtering. It's just not exposed to userspace. > Mostly USB devices, afaik. Any other devices that you would like to > mention ? I don't understand this sentence. Any device not ignoring (a not-set) TS_PAYLOAD_ONLY-flag should be compatible. >> * "The current API doesn't allow you to tune into -S2 transponders." > We have solved this one already, drivers also exists, people watch S2 > What i pushed out last, is out here: > http://jusst.de/manu/04-Jul-07/stb0899.tar.bz2 ok. I don't like any part of the API (FE_SET_FRONTEND) to be obsoleted, but ok, I can live with it. Please specify a bit more explictely which parts of the API are mutually exclusive (FE_SET_FRONTEND vs. DVBFE_SET_PARAMS). why are some IOCTLs called DVBFE_ and others FE_? BTW, this doesn't hold my "backward compatibility" request - if an application wants to tune a dvb-s transponder with the new api (DVBFE_SET_PARAMS), it won't run against an old api (which only implements FE_SET_FRONTEND, but could technically tune). But it seems that nobody else cares about this. Felix _______________________________________________ linux-dvb mailing list linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
