Re: HVR 4000 hybrid card still producing multiple frontends for single adapter

[Lars Hanisch <dvb@flensrocker.de>]

Hi,

Am 24.01.2012 16:16, schrieb Devin Heitmueller:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Antti Palosaari<crope@iki.fi>  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.

  The two frontends of the HVR 4000 can only be open mutually exclusive so I think the recent changes are for those 
devices, aren't they? Sure you can connect DVB-T and DVB-S at the same time to the HVR 4000, but you can't use it in 
parallel.

Lars.

>
> 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
>