On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 7:21 AM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Em 21-10-2011 01:33, Taylor Ralph escreveu: >> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Taylor Ralph <taylor.ralph@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 2:14 PM, Devin Heitmueller >>> <dheitmueller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Janne Grunau <j@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> I think such scenario is unlikely but I don't know it for sure and >>>>> I don't want to force anyone to test every firmware version. >>>>> Ignoring them for firmware version < 16 should be safe since we assume >>>>> they had no effect. Returning -EINVAL might break API-ignoring >>>>> applications written with the HD PVR in mind but I think it's a better >>>>> approach than silently ignoring those controls. >>>> >>>> At this point, let's just make it so that the old behavior is >>>> unchanged for old firmwares, meaning from both an API standpoint as >>>> well as what the values are. At some point if somebody cares enough >>>> to go back and fix the support so that the controls actually work with >>>> old firmwares, they can take that up as a separate task. In reality, >>>> it is likely that nobody will ever do that, as the "easy answer" is >>>> just to upgrade to firmware 16. >>>> >>>> Taylor, could you please tweak your patch to that effect and resubmit? >>>> >>> >>> Sure, I'll try to get to it tonight and have it tested. >>> >> >> OK, I've updated the patch per your requests. I made this patch >> against the latest kernel source but I'm unable to test since my >> 2.6.32 kernel has symbol issues with the new v4l code. > > Please, add your Signed-off-by: to the patch. This is a requirement for > it to be accepted upstream[1]. > > Thanks, > Mauro > > [1] See: http://linuxtv.org/wiki/index.php/Development:_Submitting_Patches#Developer.27s_Certificate_of_Origin_1.1 > >> >> Regards. >> -- >> Taylor > > Sorry about that. The updated patch is attached. Thanks. -- Taylor
Attachment:
hdpvr_v3.diff
Description: Binary data
