On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 07:52:02AM -0500, Jon Smirl wrote: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 7:35 AM, Andy Walls <awalls@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 2009-12-07 at 20:22 -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > >> On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 09:42:22PM -0500, Andy Walls wrote: > > > >> > So I'll whip up an RC-6 Mode 6A decoder for cx23885-input.c before the > >> > end of the month. > >> > > >> > I can setup the CX2388[58] hardware to look for both RC-5 and RC-6 with > >> > a common set of parameters, so I may be able to set up the decoders to > >> > handle decoding from two different remote types at once. The HVR boards > >> > can ship with either type of remote AFAIK. > >> > > >> > I wonder if I can flip the keytables on the fly or if I have to create > >> > two different input devices? > >> > > >> > >> Can you distinguish between the 2 remotes (not receivers)? > > > > Yes. RC-6 and RC-5 are different enough to distinguish between the two. > > (Honestly I could pile on more protocols that have similar pulse time > > periods, but that's complexity for no good reason and I don't know of a > > vendor that bundles 3 types of remotes per TV card.) > > > > > >> Like I said, > >> I think the preferred way is to represent every remote that can be > >> distinguished from each other as a separate input device. > > > > OK. With RC-5, NEC, and RC-6 at least there is also an address or > > system byte or word to distingish different remotes. However creating > > multiple input devices on the fly for detected remotes would be madness > > - especially with a decoding error in the address bits. > > I agree that creating devices on the fly has problems. Another > solution is to create one device for each map that is loaded. There > would be a couple built-in maps for bundled remotes - each would > create a device. Then the user could load more maps with each map > creating a device. > > Incoming scancodes are matched against all of the loaded maps and a > keycode event is generated if a match occurs. > How many sancodes do we need to reliably recognize the device though? I am not sure users would want to press 5 random buttons in order to start using the remote, unless it happens exactly once and then we manage to store the data somewhere. > This illustrates why there should an EV_IR event which communicates > scancodes, without this event you can't see the scancodes that don't > match a map entry. A scancode would be first matched against the map, > then if there as no match an EV_IR event would be reported. Just report MSC_SCAN always. As I said elsewhere we can extend it to be multi-dword if needed (just need to agree on endianness). -- Dmitry -- 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
