On Mon, 2010-02-15 at 08:10 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: > On Sunday 14 February 2010 23:10:48 Andy Walls wrote: > > On Sun, 2010-02-14 at 16:18 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: > > > On Saturday 13 February 2010 00:17:44 Hans Verkuil wrote: > > > > On Friday 12 February 2010 23:36:20 Pete Eberlein wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 2010-02-12 at 22:03 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: > > > After thinking about this a bit more I decided that this tuner should be split > > > up into two drivers: one for the mpx device and one for the actual tuner. This > > > should be fairly easy to do. > > > > > > One other thing that this accomplishes is that it is easier to see whether the > > > tuner code can actually be merged into tuner-types.c. From what I can see now > > > I would say that that is possible for the NTSC_M and NTSC_M_JP models. The > > > PAL/SECAM model is harder since it needs to setup the tuner whenever the > > > standard changes. But it seems that that is also possible by adding code > > > to simple_std_setup() in tuner-simple.c. > > > > > > I'm pretty sure that these tuners can just be folded into tuner-types.c > > > and tuner-simple.c. We probably only need an mpx driver. > > > > > > Andy, can you also take a look? > > > > Sure. It looks like to me you actually have three chips: > > > > - oscillator/mixer (at address 0x60 like a TUA6030) > > - programmable IF PLL demodulator (at address 0x43 like a TDA9887) > > - MPX demodulator/dematrix IC. > > I've been focusing so much on the IF_I2C_ADDR and MPX_I2C_ADDR defines that > I completely missed the fact that there is also the tuner at 0x60 :-( > > You are completely correct: it looks very much like a standard simple > tuner + tda9887. I should mention that I noticed 1. The IF demodulator seems to programmed with an usual take over point: +8 dB, IIRC. A port into the common tuner stuff should lose track of setting like these. 2. This driver has some funny IF offset "IFPCoff" that is applied when calling set freq. tuner-simple and friends may need slight modifications to handle this requirment for these tuner, but it shouldn't be hard. The trend in tuner-simple has been to add a switch() statement when these sorts of exceptions are needed, as it is most expedient. IMHO, this is a bad trend. I think it would be better to modify the tuner information structures to handle this "IFPCoff" value. Just an opinion... 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
