On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:03:16AM +0100, Pedro Côrte-Real wrote: > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 9:57 PM, Richard Zidlicky <rz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:43:09AM +0100, Pedro Côrte-Real wrote: > > > >> status C Y | signal 66% | snr 0% | ber 2097151 | unc 0 | > >> status SC YL | signal 65% | snr 0% | ber 2097151 | unc 0 | FE_HAS_LOCK > >> status SC YL | signal 65% | snr 0% | ber 2097151 | unc 0 | FE_HAS_LOCK > >> status SC YL | signal 65% | snr 0% | ber 2097151 | unc 0 | FE_HAS_LOCK > >> status SC YL | signal 64% | snr 0% | ber 2097151 | unc 0 | FE_HAS_LOCK > >> status SC YL | signal 65% | snr 0% | ber 2097151 | unc 0 | FE_HAS_LOCK > >> status SC YL | signal 65% | snr 0% | ber 2097151 | unc 0 | FE_HAS_LOCK > >> status SC YL | signal 65% | snr 0% | ber 2097151 | unc 0 | FE_HAS_LOCK > >> status SC YL | signal 64% | snr 0% | ber 2097151 | unc 0 | FE_HAS_LOCK > > > > the ber is very strange. It should be 0 or very close. > > What are the ber and the unc? And does the 0% snr make sense? Why the > % scale for that? berr is supposed to be the bit error rate. The values displayed here appear to be bogus - then again I am not familiar with this particular driver so maybe just the error reporting is bogus. The w_scan results also look pretty bad. Newest kernel is allways worth a try. Richard -- 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
