On Mon, 2009-11-23 at 22:46 +0100, Krzysztof Halasa wrote: > lirc@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Christoph Bartelmus) writes: > > >> I think we shouldn't at this time worry about IR transmitters. > > > > Sorry, but I have to disagree strongly. > > Any interface without transmitter support would be absolutely unacceptable > > for many LIRC users, including myself. > > I don't say don't use a transmitter. > I say the transmitter is not an input device, they are completely > independent functions. I can't see any reason to try and fit both in the > same interface - can you? The underlying hardware need not be completely independent. For example, the CX2584[0123], CX2388[578], CX23418, and CX2310[012] chips have IR hardware that shares a common timing source, interrupt line, interrupt status register, etc, between IR Rx and Tx. They can also do things like loopback of Tx to Rx. That said, an underlying hardware implementation can be split up to user space with separate interfaces Tx and Rx. The underlying driver module would have to manage the dependencies. I would guess that would be easier for driver modules, if the userspace interfaces were designed with such combined IR Tx/Rx hardware in mind. 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
