On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 8:33 AM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Pavel Machek wrote: >>>> That is why I think we should go the other way around - introduce the >>>> core which receivers could plug into and decoder framework and once it >>>> is ready register lirc-dev as one of the available decoders. >>>> >>> I've committed already some IR restruct code on my linux-next -git tree: >>> >>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/mchehab/linux-next.git >>> >>> The code there basically moves the input/evdev registering code and >>> scancode/keycode management code into a separate ir-core module. >>> >>> To make my life easy, I've moved the code temporarily into drivers/media/IR. >>> This way, it helps me to move V4L specific code outside ir-core and to later >>> use it for DVB. After having it done, probably the better is to move it to >>> be under /drivers or /drivers/input. >> >> Well, -next is for stuff to be merged into 2.6.34. You are quite an >> optimist. >> Pavel > > Well, we need those changes anyway for the in-kernel drivers, and I'm not seeing > on the current patches any reason for not having them for 2.6.34. > > I've added all the ir-core patches I did so far at linux-next. This helps people > to review and contribute. > > The patches are already working with the in-kernel em28xx driver, allowing to > replace the keycode table and the protocol used by the hardware IR decoder. > I tested here by replacing an RC-5 based IR table (Hauppauge Grey) by a NEC > based IR table (Terratec Cinergy XS remote controller). > > The current Remote Controller core module (ir-core) is currently doing: > > - Implementation of the existing EVIO[G|S]KEYCODE, expanding/feeing memory > dynamically, based on the needed size for scancode/keycode table; > > - scancodes can be up to 16 bits currently; > > - sysfs is registering /sys/class/irrcv and creating one branch for each > different RC receiver, numbering from irrcv0 to irrcv255; > > - one irrcv note is created: current_protocol; > > - reading /sys/class/irrcv/irrcv*/current_protocol returns the protocol > currently used by the driver; > > - writing to /sys/class/irrcv/irrcv*/current_protocol changes the protocol > to a new one, by calling a callback, asking the driver to change the protocol. If > the protocol is not support, it returns -EINVAL; > > - all V4L drivers are already using ir-core; > > - em28xx driver is implementing current_protocol show/store support. > > TODO: I'd add a pulse based receiver like a MSMCE to make sure the core API is right. MSME has transmit hardware too. What about creating multiple evdev devices with their own keymaps off from a single receiver? That's a key part of making multi-function remotes work. > 1) Port DVB drivers to use ir-core, removing the duplicated (and incomplete > - as table size can't change on DVB's implementation) code that exists there; > > 2) add current_protocol support on other drivers; > > 3) link the corresponding input/evdev interfaces with /sys/class/irrcv/irrcv*; > > 4) make the keytable.c application aware of the sysfs vars; > > 5) add an attribute to uniquely identify a remote controller; > > 6) write or convert an existing application to load IR tables at runtime; > > 7) get the complete 16-bit scancodes used by V4L drivers; > > 8) add decoder/lirc_dev glue to ir-core; > > 9) add lirc_dev module and in-kernel decoders; > > 10) extend keycode table replacement to support big/variable sized scancodes; > > 11) rename IR->RC; > > 12) redesign or remove ir-common module. It currently handles in-kernel > keycode tables and a few helper routines for raw pulse/space decode; > > 13) move drivers/media/IR to a better place; > > > comments: > > Tasks (1) to (6) for sure can happen to 2.6.34, depending on people's spare > time for it; > > (7) is probably the more complex task, since it requires to re-test all in-kernel > supported remote controlle scancode/keycode tables, to get the complete IR keycode > and rewrite the getkeycode functions that are currently masking the IR code into 7 bits. > We'll need users help on this task, but this can be done gradually, like I did with > two RC keytables on em28xx driver, while preserving the other keytables as-is. > > (8) I suggest that this glue will be submitted together with lirc_dev patch > series, as the biggest client for it is lirc. In principle, kfifo seems the better > interface for lirc_dev -> decoders interface. For the decoders -> RC core interface, > there's an interface already used on V4L drivers, provided by ir-common, using evdev > kernel API. This may need some review. > > (9) depends on lirc API discusions. My proposal is that people submit an RFC > with the lirc API reviewed to the ML's, for people to ack/nack/comment. After that, > re-submit the lirc_dev module integrating it into ir-core and with the reviewed API; > > (10) depends on EVIO[G|S]KEYCODE discussions we've already started. I did a proposal > about it. I'll review, based on the comments and re-submit it; > > (11) if none is against renaming IR as RC, I'll do it on a next patch; > > (12) depends on having lirc_dev added, for the removal of ir-functions.c. With > respect to the keytables, maybe one interesting alternative is to use a logic close to > nls tables that exists at fs, allowing to individually insert or remove an IR keytable > in-kernel. > > (13) has low priority. While not finishing the DVB integration with RC core > and reviewing the remaining bits of the ir-common module. > > Cheers, > Mauro. > -- Jon Smirl jonsmirl@xxxxxxxxx -- 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
