Steven Toth wrote:
> A good example of this in the current kernel (without any MFE patches)
> is the current cx23885 driver, that registers adapter0 and adapter1 with
> two different ATSC frontends. I question (and argue) that it should
> really be /dev/dvb/adapter0/demux{0,1}
Did you mean frontend{0,1} here?
> The same is also true for the for the multi-frontend patches, it should
> probably change (as part of an overall adapterX overhaul) to match the
> LinuxTV DVB API and register only one demux device.
>
> That's a much larger project, and has not been addressed yet. Many users
> will probably also argue that it's unimportant work, when application
> are currently working.
>
> My opinion is that we would review the adapter usage and determine
> whether we need or want to change that. If we do change it we should
> probably add some better application interfaces from the adapter inode -
> In a model similar to the S2API has done for frontends. Applications
> would then be able to query board specific details in a way that cannot
> be easily done now.
Yes, such an interface is definitely missing.
> However, regardless of my opinions, it would be a mistake to hold back a
> merge of the current multi-frontend patches. Instead, we should merge
> the large number of MFE patches and start a larger adapter level
> discussion and slowly evolve with smaller patches. (We'll need someone
> to draft an RFC).
There's no need to hold back the merge. Even if someone decides to change
the code to match the DVB API later, then it wouldn't be a change to the
API itself. (Or is there any change being done to the user interface now?)
Application developers can already add support for DMX_SET_SOURCE now.
> Are you volunteering to address this larger subject?
No.
Regards,
Andreas
_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
