From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from smtp.bredband2.com ([83.219.192.166]:36272 "EHLO smtp.bredband2.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753234AbbCPVWg (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Mar 2015 17:22:36 -0400 Message-ID: <5507499A.6010302@southpole.se> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 22:22:34 +0100 From: Benjamin Larsson MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Antti Palosaari CC: Linux Media Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] rtl28xxu: swap frontend order for slave demods References: <1426460275-3766-1-git-send-email-benjamin@southpole.se> <1426460275-3766-4-git-send-email-benjamin@southpole.se> <550740A7.2080809@southpole.se> <55074543.4060303@iki.fi> In-Reply-To: <55074543.4060303@iki.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 03/16/2015 10:04 PM, Antti Palosaari wrote: > On 03/16/2015 10:44 PM, Benjamin Larsson wrote: >> On 03/15/2015 11:57 PM, Benjamin Larsson wrote: >>> Some devices have 2 demodulators, when this is the case >>> make the slave demod be listed first. Enumerating the slave >>> first will help legacy applications to use the hardware. >>> >> >> Ignore this patch for now. Stuff gets broken if applied. > > I will not apply it even you fix it. I don't like idea adding such hack > to kernel in order to workaround buggy applications. There is many older > devices having similar situation, having 2 demods - one for DVB-T and > one for DVB-C. So there has been surely enough time for app developers > to add support for multiple frontends... laziness. > > Quite same happened for DVB-T2 support. I added initially hack for > CXD2820R driver in order to support DVB-T2 even applications are not > supporting it. That was implemented using trick driver did DVB-T2 tune > when DVB-T tune fails. After many years I did another DVB-T2 driver > Si2168 and didn't add such hack anymore. And what was result; almost all > applications were still lacking proper DVB-T2 support, after many many > years... > > So I will never ever add any hacks to driver to workaround application > support as application developers are so lazy to add support or new > things if there is some workaround available. > > regards > Antti > While I agree with your reasoning, the point with this patch is just to register one demod before another. If that is a hack or not I don't know. I have used it locally for test purposes and it is not needed for actual use so consider the patch withdrawn. MvH Benjamin Larsson