On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 05:03:28PM -0500, Devin Heitmueller wrote: > On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Steven Toth <stoth@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I'm out of time. Someone else want to jump in and assist? > > > > - Steve > > Given David's last summary of results, it seems like the BER indicator > for that particular demodulator is completely unreliable (which isn't > terribly surprising). If you take that out of the equation, it seems > like the only time there is corruption is when both the 115 and the > x50 is encoding. The BER isn't totally unreliable. Yes, when it's low, it does seem to be meaningless. However, when it's high, as in my recent attempts to try a 115 by itself, it indicates that nothing will work. > So, it seems like we're back to either an RF issue or a DMA issue. > Did David attempt to move the cards farther apart, or put any sort of > shielding between the two cards? If the shielding has any effect, > then we're probably talking about an RF issue. If it had no effect, > then we are probably talking about a DMA issue. I tried separating the cards as far as possible. I tried shoving a small manual (~1/8 inch thick) between the 115 cards and the x50 cards to shield them. Neither action had any effect. Also, one of the tests I tried yesterday had the HDTV5 between the 115 and the x50s. The 115 showed corruption and the HDTV5 didn't even though it was nearest to the x50s. > Either way, it seems like we should stop talking about the BER as any > sort of indicator of a problem. David -- David Engel david@xxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
