Jon Smirl wrote: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:40 AM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab > <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Jon Smirl wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 7:35 AM, Andy Walls <awalls@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On Mon, 2009-12-07 at 20:22 -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 09:42:22PM -0500, Andy Walls wrote: >>>>>> So I'll whip up an RC-6 Mode 6A decoder for cx23885-input.c before the >>>>>> end of the month. >>>>>> >>>>>> I can setup the CX2388[58] hardware to look for both RC-5 and RC-6 with >>>>>> a common set of parameters, so I may be able to set up the decoders to >>>>>> handle decoding from two different remote types at once. The HVR boards >>>>>> can ship with either type of remote AFAIK. >>>>>> >>>>>> I wonder if I can flip the keytables on the fly or if I have to create >>>>>> two different input devices? >>>>>> >>>>> Can you distinguish between the 2 remotes (not receivers)? >>>> Yes. RC-6 and RC-5 are different enough to distinguish between the two. >>>> (Honestly I could pile on more protocols that have similar pulse time >>>> periods, but that's complexity for no good reason and I don't know of a >>>> vendor that bundles 3 types of remotes per TV card.) >>>> >>>> >>>>> Like I said, >>>>> I think the preferred way is to represent every remote that can be >>>>> distinguished from each other as a separate input device. >>>> OK. With RC-5, NEC, and RC-6 at least there is also an address or >>>> system byte or word to distingish different remotes. However creating >>>> multiple input devices on the fly for detected remotes would be madness >>>> - especially with a decoding error in the address bits. >>> I agree that creating devices on the fly has problems. Another >>> solution is to create one device for each map that is loaded. There >>> would be a couple built-in maps for bundled remotes - each would >>> create a device. Then the user could load more maps with each map >>> creating a device. >> No, please. We currently have already 89 different keymaps in-kernel. Creating >> 89 different interfaces per IR receiver is not useful at all. >> >> IMO, the interfaces should be created as the keymaps are associated >> to an specific IR receiver. > > Each IR receiver device driver would have a built-in keymap for the > remote bundled with it. When you load the driver it will poke the > input system and install the map. Any additional keymaps would get > loaded from user space. You would load one keymap per input device. > > You might have 89 maps in the kernel with each map being built into > the device driver for those 89 IR receivers. But you'll only own one > or two of those devices so only one or two of the 89 maps will load. > Building the map for the bundled receiver into the device driver is an > important part of achieving "just works". > > I suspect we'll have a 1,000 maps defined after ten years, most of > these maps will be loaded from user space. But you'll only have two or > three loaded at any one time into your kernel. You need one map per > input device created. These maps are tiny, less than 1KB. > > Having all of these maps is the price of allowing everyone to use any > more that they please. If you force the use of universal remotes most > of the maps can be eliminated. Makes sense. Yet, I would add an option at Kbuild to create a module or not with the bundled IR keymaps. So, it should be possible to have all of them completely on userspace or having them at kernelspace. Cheers, Mauro. -- 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
