On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 6:03 PM, Frank Dischner <phaedrus961@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > While I'm at it, I thought I'd go ahead and make a patch to remove the > top bits from the vsb table, but I've got a question about that. I > think the first four entries are unnecessary. I'm pretty sure 8090 and > 8091 have to do with the 8522's i2c controller and 4092 is a status > register. I have no idea what 2005 is, but the new code would change > it to A005 and I don't remember seeing either in any of the traces I > did (though I never did a vsb trace). Is this correct or am I missing > something? If I make a patch, can you or someone else test it for me? > (can't get a signal here) Yeah, I noticed the 4092 entry. The "4" means it's a read operation so it almost certainly shouldn't be in the table. I just haven't taken the time to look closer at a Windows trace to see if it was *really* a register read operation that got stuck into the table or whether it was supposed to be a write operation. I haven't reviewed the VSB table yes, so I am not sure about the other entries. Devin -- Devin J. Heitmueller http://www.devinheitmueller.com AIM: devinheitmueller -- 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
