2017-12-01 12:38 GMT+01:00 pieterg <pieterg@xxxxxxx>: > Hi, > > The recent removal of DMX_SET_SOURCE > > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/13adefbe9e566c6db91579e4ce17f1e5193d6f2c > > and earlier removal of the set_source callback > > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/1e92bbe08ad9fc0d5ec05174c176a9bc54921733 > > leads to the question how the situation of having multiple frontends on > a single dvb adapter should be handled nowadays. > Suppose the routing is flexible, any demux could be sourced by any frontend. > In the past, this has been achieved by using the set_source callback, > allowing userspace to configure the routing by using the DMX_SET_SOURCE > ioctl. > > The connect_frontend / disconnect_frontend callbacks are currently only > called for the memory frontend, so it seems no longer possible to select > hardware frontends. > How do you guys see this, what does the standard dictate in this case? > Should we assume a 1:1 mapping between frontendN:demuxN and forbid > dynamic routing? Or am I overlooking something? > > In my opinion, supporting dynamic routing would be an advantage. > Especially when the number of (hardware) demuxes is smaller than the > number of (hardware) frontends. It was already discussed with Mauro, when me (and may be some others complained about such removals). The rule is simple - if you have HW with multiple frontends, then you can provide patch and revive the old stuffs. Mauro's POV is = no user of such callbacks/ioctl means removal of that. /Honza
