On Nov 25, 2009, at 2:27 PM, Krzysztof Halasa wrote: > Jarod Wilson <jarod@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Ah, but the approach I'd take to converting to in-kernel decoding[*] >> would be this: >> >> 1) bring drivers in in their current state >> - users keep using lirc as they always have >> >> 2) add in-kernel decoding infra that feeds input layer > > Well. I think the above is fine enough. > >> 3) add option to use in-kernel decoding to existing lirc drivers >> - users can keep using lirc as they always have >> - users can optionally try out in-kernel decoding via a modparam >> >> 4) switch the default mode from lirc decode to kernel decode for each lirc driver >> - modparam can be used to continue using lirc interface instead >> >> 5) assuming users aren't coming at us with pitchforks, because things don't actually work reliably with in-kernel decoding, deprecate the lirc interface in driver >> >> 6) remove lirc interface from driver, its now a pure input device > > But 3-6 are IMHO not useful. We don't need lirc _or_ input. We need > both at the same time: input for the general, simple case and for > consistency with receivers decoding in firmware/hardware; input for > special cases such as mapping the keys, protocols not supported by the > kernel and so on (also for in-tree media drivers where applicable). > >> [*] assuming, of course, that it was actually agreed upon that >> in-kernel decoding was the right way, the only way, all others will be >> shot on sight. ;) > > I think: in-kernel decoding only as the general, primary means. Not the > only one. Okay, I read ya now. I got my wires crossed, thought you were advocating for dropping the lirc interface entirely. I think we're on the same page then. :) -- Jarod Wilson jarod@xxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
