On Sat, 2011-01-15 at 07:50 -0500, Andy Walls wrote: > Jarod Wilson <jarod@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >Forgot to mention: I think it was suggested that one could use ir-kbd-i2c > >for receive and lirc_zilog for transmit, at the same time. With ir-kbd-i2c > >already loaded, lirc_zilog currently won't bind to anything. > With my newly hacked lirc_zilog, try using the 'tx_only' parameter > please. It's not quite ready yet, but I'd like to know if it can > bind. I have now tested this. Using the 'tx_only' module parameter to lirc_zilog appears to allow ir-kbd-i2c and lirc_zilog to coexist, for I2C subsystem binding at least. It does not appear to matter what order the two modules are loaded. I tried it both ways. However, lirc_zilog sharing of Z8 is not fully functional yet. I need to change things to have the bridge drivers provide a IR transceiver mutex to both lirc_zilog and ir-kbd-i2c. lirc_zilog and ir-kbd-i2c would use that mutex for exclusive access to the Z8 when needed, if it was provided by the bridge driver. I view proper sharing of the Z8 as an important requirement, because of two use cases: 1. User only wants to use the Z8 for IR Rx. User doesn't want to fetch the lirc_zilog required firmware or perform any LIRC setup. 2. User only wants to use the Z8 for IR Tx. User uses some other ir-kbd-i2c supported receiver and remote IR Rx. Maybe use case #2 is too rare to worry about? However, if one accepts both use cases as valid, then ir-kbd-i2c must support the Z8, and lirc_zilog must be able to coexist with ir-kbd-i2c. Proper sharing of the Z8 is, however, lower on my to-do list than fixing some internal lirc_zilog problems. 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
