lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] What are the goals for the architecture of an in-kernel IR system?

> > This sounds like "merge first, think later"...
> >
> > The question is why we need to merge lirc interface right now, before we
> > agreed on the sybsystem architecture? Noone _in kernel_ user lirc-dev
> > yet and, looking at the way things are shaping, no drivers will be
> > _directly_ using it after it is complete. So, even if we merge it right
> > away, the code will have to be restructured and reworked. Unfortunately,
> > just merging what Jarod posted, will introduce sysfs hierarchy which
> > is userspace interface as well (although we not as good maintaining it
> > at times) and will add more constraints on us.
> >
> > That is why I think we should go the other way around - introduce the
> > core which receivers could plug into and decoder framework and once it
> > is ready register lirc-dev as one of the available decoders.
> >
>
> I've committed already some IR restruct code on my linux-next -git tree:
>
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/mchehab/linux-next.git
>
> The code there basically moves the input/evdev registering code and
> scancode/keycode management code into a separate ir-core module.
>
> To make my life easy, I've moved the code temporarily into drivers/media/IR.
> This way, it helps me to move V4L specific code outside ir-core and to later
> use it for DVB. After having it done, probably the better is to move it to
> be under /drivers or /drivers/input.

Well, -next is for stuff to be merged into 2.6.34. You are quite an
optimist.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-15 12:53    [W:0.246 / U:4.260 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site