From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail.kapsi.fi ([217.30.184.167]:52141 "EHLO mail.kapsi.fi" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1749667Ab3AGVHH (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jan 2013 16:07:07 -0500 Message-ID: <50EB38D4.5080304@iki.fi> Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 23:06:28 +0200 From: Antti Palosaari MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Malcolm Priestley CC: Damien Bally , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , linux-media@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb id addition for Terratec Cinergy T Stick Dual rev. 2 References: <5064A3AD.70009@free.fr> <5064ABD2.2060106@iki.fi> <5065D1AC.5030800@free.fr> <5065E487.80502@iki.fi> <1348860617.2782.26.camel@Route3278> <20120929143305.4859603e@redhat.com> <50688332.7020406@free.fr> <20121001081540.69bdae23@redhat.com> <50697CBE.8060001@iki.fi> <20121006124020.2cc2f534@redhat.com> <50EB2405.80309@iki.fi> <1357589638.4360.14.camel@canaries64> In-Reply-To: <1357589638.4360.14.camel@canaries64> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 01/07/2013 10:13 PM, Malcolm Priestley wrote: > On Mon, 2013-01-07 at 21:37 +0200, Antti Palosaari wrote: >> On 10/06/2012 06:40 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: >>> Em Mon, 01 Oct 2012 14:21:34 +0300 >>> Antti Palosaari escreveu: >>> >>>> On 10/01/2012 02:15 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: >>>>> Em Sun, 30 Sep 2012 19:36:50 +0200 >>>>> Damien Bally escreveu: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Le 29/09/2012 19:33, Mauro Carvalho Chehab a écrit : >>>>>> It seems that the it931x variant has bcdDevice equal to 2.00, >>>>>>> from Damien's email: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> idVendor 0x0ccd TerraTec Electronic GmbH >>>>>>> idProduct 0x0099 >>>>>>> bcdDevice 2.00 >>>>>>> iManufacturer 1 ITE Technologies, Inc. >>>>>>> iProduct 2 DVB-T TV Stick >>>>>>> iSerial 0 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If the af9015 variant uses another bcdDevice, the fix should be simple. >>>>>> >>>>>> Alas, according to >>>>>> http://www.linuxtv.org/wiki/index.php/TerraTec_Cinergy_T_USB_Dual_RC the >>>>>> af9015 variant appears to have the same bcdDevice. I join both lsusb >>>>>> outputs for comparison. >>>>> >>>>> Well, then the alternative is to let both drivers to handle this USB ID, >>>>> and add a code there on each of them that will check if the device is the >>>>> right one, perhaps by looking at iProduct string. If the driver doesn't >>>>> recognize it, it should return -ENODEV at .probe() time. The USB core will >>>>> call the second driver. >>>> >>>> It is the easiest solution, but there should be very careful. Those >>>> strings could change from device to device. I used earlier af9015 eeprom >>>> hash (those string as coming from the eeprom) to map TerraTec dual >>>> remote controller and git bug report quite soon as it didn't worked. >>>> After I looked the reason I found out they was changed some not >>>> meaningful value. >>> >>> Yeah, those strings can change, especially when vendors don't care enough >>> to use a different USB ID/bcdDevice for different models. Yet, seems to >>> be the cleaner approach, among the alternatives. >> >> Damien, care to test? >> http://git.linuxtv.org/anttip/media_tree.git/shortlog/refs/heads/it9135_tuner >> >> I split tuner out from IT9135 driver and due to that AF9035 driver >> supports IT9135 too (difference between AF9035 and IT9135 is integrated >> RF-tuner). I added iManufacturer based checks for both AF9015 and AF9035 >> drivers > > I can't see the point of adding this to the af9035/af9033 driver. It is > going to turn into one enormous blob. Stop speaking bullshit! It increases AF9035/AF9033 driver size marginally. I could guess total binary size of AF9035+AF9033+IT913X (IT913X == that new tuner driver) is smaller than size of your IT9135 blob. > The it913x is a stable driver and has it own entity moving forward. > > The only thing that needs to happen is the id is added to it913x driver > and if it doesn't apply drop it. > > Nack. If you remember about year back when IT9135 was mainlined I reviewed that stuff and criticized it wasn't split correctly. I also pointed out all what is needed is new RF-tuner driver as AF9035/AF9033 is just same silicon, but without a integrated tuner. You said on one mail something like it is too much different than AF9035 family, I didn't cared to start stupid yes/no discussion on that time. You don't have any technical reason to NACK it. Last time I was "discussing" with DS3000+TS2020 split with you and you were against. Same happens now. I ask you to look driver guidelines [1] and stop speaking BS, instead start fixing your own stuff and you will never end up situation like that. [1] http://lwn.net/Articles/529490/ Antti -- http://palosaari.fi/