On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Antti Palosaari <crope@xxxxxx> wrote: > So what was the actual benefit then just introduce one way more to implement > same thing. As I sometime understood from Manu's talk there will not be > difference if my device is based of DVB-T + DVB-C demod combination or just > single chip that does same. Now there is devices that have same > characteristics but different interface. For one thing, you cannot use DVB-T and DVB-C at the same time if they're on the same demod. With many of the devices that have S/S2 and DVB-T, you can be using them both in parallel. Having multiple frontends actually makes sense since you don't want two applications talking to the same frontend at the same time but operating on different tuners/streams. That said, there could be opportunities for consolidation if the demods could not be used in parallel, but I believe that would require a nontrivial restructuring of the core code and API. In my opinion the entry point for the kernel ABI should *never* have been the demodulator but rather the bridge driver (where you can exercise greater control over what can be used in parallel). Devin -- Devin J. Heitmueller - Kernel Labs http://www.kernellabs.com -- 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
