Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 10 Sep 2008 10:19:47 -0400 | From | Christoph Hellwig <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 06/18] lirc driver for the ATI USB RF remote receiver |
| |
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 03:44:17PM +0200, Janne Grunau wrote: > On Wednesday 10 September 2008 15:14:32 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 09:05:58AM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: > > > True, though I think some users still prefer using them with the > > > lirc drivers for assorted reasons. Configuring something like > > > mythtv to work with the ati_remote{,2} driver appears to be a bit > > > more complex (or at least non- standard vs. several other popular > > > remotes) and not as functional vs. configuring mythtv > > > w/lirc_atiusb. > > > > Bad idea to have two drivers for the same piece of hardware. And > > this gets straight back into the why should lirc be different from > > the input layer point raised earlies. I think we really shouldn't > > keep lirc as a separate subsystem, but make sure all the drivers are > > written to the input layer. > > Some drivers don't report events but deliver the signal to the lirc > daemon. The daemon decodes the signal. Decoding of several IR protocols > and mapping of each possible remote to events are things much easier > done in userspace.
Mixing these two in the same interface seems like a really bad idea. The input layer is the right interface for devices that directly produce events. If you want to decode them in userspace you need a different interface for the daemon. Not sure why you really want to do this in userspace, though.
> Aslo LIRC is not only about IR input but also output.
The input layer also does some outputs, like the pc speaker :)
| |