On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:54 PM, Antti Palosaari <crope@xxxxxx> wrote: > On 27.04.2012 23:40, Konstantin Dimitrov wrote: >> >> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:37 PM, Konstantin Dimitrov >>> >>> however, i want to pointed out few other problems - they are off-topic >>> >>> as not related to drivers for Montage chips, but related as far as >>> we're putting some order and making things in a proper way and those >>> those things are out of that order: >>> >>> - there are 2 drivers for the same DVB-S2 tuner: ST 6110, respectively >>> "stv6110.c" and "stv6110x.c" >>> >>> - there are 2 drivers for the same DVB-S2 demodulator family: >>> respectively stv090x* and stv0900* >>> >>> the above couldn't be more wrong - in fact i can submit patches to >>> make all drivers that relies on stv090x* and "stv6110.c" to use >>> stv090x* and "stv6110x.c" instead except the NetUP board, for which in >> >> >>> my opinion someone should submit patches using stv090x* and >>> "stv6110x.c" and subsequently stv090x* and "stv6110.c" be removed - >> >> >> to correct a typo: and subsequently stv0900* and "stv6110.c" be removed >> >>> unless someone have some real argument why stv090x* and "stv6110.c" >> >> >> the same: unless someone have some real argument why stv0900* and >> "stv6110.c" >> >>> should stay or even if for why they should replace stv090x* and >>> "stv6110x.c" and subsequently stv090x* and "stv6110x.c" be removed >>> instead. so, the case with ST 6110 and STV090x support is the most >>> frustrating and out of order thing that i can indicate regarding the >>> support of DVB-S2 chips in the kernel and i hope you will take care as >>> maintainer to be resolved or at least someone to explain why the >>> current state is like that - or point me out to explanation if such >>> was already made to the mailing list. so, what i'm suggesting is >>> "spring cleaning" of all DVB-S2 tuner/demodulator drivers in the >>> kernel - if it's not done now in the future the mess will only >>> increase. > > > That stv090x stuff is discussed many times earlier too. It is mistake done > for the some reasons. In theory there should be only one driver per > chip/logical entity but for the non-technical reason it was failed. And as > it is failed at the very first try it is hard to correct later. > OK, what about i commit to correct it to the degree i can? that degree is : patch all bridge drivers to use stv090x* and stv6110x* except the driver for the NetUP card since i don't have any similar hardware, which i can use for testing and remove the less mature and less versatile drivers involved in the mess, i.e. stv6110.* and stv0900*. until the NetUP don't submit patch to utilize stv090x* and stv6110x* their card will be left in unsupported stage - at least that way 99% of the mess will be cleaned and subsequently the whole mess, because i guess someone with NetUP hardware will contribute what i can't do. > > regards > Antti > -- > http://palosaari.fi/ -- 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
