On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 08:00 -0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Andy Walls wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 14:55 -0500, Jarod Wilson wrote: > >> On Dec 2, 2009, at 2:33 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > Both of those IR devices are/will be encapsulated in a v4l2_subdevice > > object internally. I was going to write lirc_v4l glue between the > > v4l2_device/v4l2_subdev_ir_ops and lirc_dev. > > > > As for the the I2C chips, I was going to go back and encapsulate those > > in the v4l2_subdevice object as well, so then my notional lirc_v4l could > > pick those up too. The I2C subsystem only allows one binding to an I2C > > client address/name on a bus. So without some new glue like a notional > > lirc_v4l, it *may* be hard to share between ir-kbd-i2c and lirc_i2c and > > lirc_zilog. > > Maybe you're having a bad time because you may be trying to integrate lirc > at the wrong place. These were just ideas. I haven't done *anything* yet. ;) > All devices at V4L tree including ir-kbd-i2c use ir-common.ko > (at /drivers/media/common tree) module to communicate to IR's. > I'm preparing some patches to extend this also to dvb-usb devices > (that uses a close enough infrastructure). > > Also, most of the decoding code are there, in a form of helper routines. > > As the idea is to provide lirc interface to all devices that can work with > raw pulse/space, the proper place is to write a subroutine there that, once > called, will make those pulse/space raw codes available to lirc and will > call the needed decoders to export them also to evdev. > > The code at ir-common module was originally built to be used by V4L, but I'm > porting the code there to be generic enough to be a library that can be used > by other drivers. So, lirc_zilog and other lirc devices that will need to open > evdev interfaces after running a decoder can use them. I think I see what you are saying (I wish could see look at a whiteboard somewhere...). Wherever we come through internally to split to 2 different userspace interfaces is fine, if you've got a big picture plan you think is feasible. That seems like a bit of perturbation to lirc_zilog and lirc_i2c. My thought was that lirc_v4l using the standardized v4l2_subdev_ir_ops interface, and maybe some new calls associted with v4l2_device, could subsume/unify all the functionality of lirc_i2c, lirc_zilog, ... lirc_whatever. Maybe that's just a poorly thought out dream though... > Due to that, we shouldn't add v4l2_subdevice there. Nothing prevents to create > a v4l2-ir-subdev glue if you want to see the IR's as subdevices, but this should > be implemented as a separate module. The v4l_subdevice just abstracted the IR hardware into a nice (mental) box for me -- easier to keep hardware separate from software decoders and userspace interface logic. Also, since v4l2_subdevices may have per subdevice /dev nodes and the /dev/../mcN nodes providing a discovery mechanism due to the Meda Controller framework, wrapping things in v4l2_subdevice may be handy for development and debug. Or ... as an additional operational interface to userspace. :D *ducks and runs for cover* Regards, Andy > Cheers, > Mauro. -- 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
