On Thu, 2009-08-27 at 18:06 -0400, Devin Heitmueller wrote: > On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 5:58 PM, Mauro Carvalho > Chehab<mchehab@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Em Thu, 27 Aug 2009 21:36:36 +0300 > > Ville Syrjälä <syrjala@xxxxxx> escreveu: > Since we're on the topic of IR support, there are probably a couple of > other things we may want to be thinking about if we plan on > refactoring the API at all: > > 1. The fact that for RC5 remote controls, the tables in ir-keymaps.c > only have the second byte. In theory, they should have both bytes > since the vendor byte helps prevents receiving spurious commands from > unrelated remote controls. We should include the ability to "ignore > the vendor byte" so we can continue to support all the remotes > currently in the ir-keymaps.c where we don't know what the vendor byte > should contain. Since I uncovered this in my research, I thought I'd share... RC-6A has a third (or thrid and fouth) byte: http://www.picbasic.nl/frameload_uk.htm?http://www.picbasic.nl/info_rc6_uk.htm for the "Customer Identifier". It appears that the mode bits in the header determine if RC-6 (mode 0) or RC-6A is in use. The position of the mode bits in the header are documented here: http://www.sbprojects.com/knowledge/ir/rc6.htm I'm guesing some MCE remotes use RC-6A. When I get CX23888 IR support to the point of actually working, I'll check both of my MCE remotes. Regards, Andy -- 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
