From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: lirc@bartelmus.de (Christoph Bartelmus) Subject: Re: [RFC] Should we create a raw input interface for IR's ? - Was: Re: [PATCH 1/3 v2] lirc core device driver infrastructure Date: 26 Nov 2009 21:37:00 +0100 Message-ID: References: <4B0E765C.2080806@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4B0E765C.2080806@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: mchehab@redhat.com Cc: dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, j@jannau.net, jarod@redhat.com, khc@pm.waw.pl, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, superm1@ubuntu.com List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org Hi Mauro, on 26 Nov 09 at 10:36, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: [...] > lircd supports input layer interface. Yet, patch 3/3 exports both devices > that support only pulse/space raw mode and devices that generate scan > codes via the raw mode interface. It does it by generating artificial > pulse codes. Nonsense! There's no generation of artificial pulse codes in the drivers. The LIRC interface includes ways to pass decoded IR codes of arbitrary length to userspace. Christoph From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752795AbZKZUoU (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:44:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751744AbZKZUoT (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:44:19 -0500 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.171]:54330 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751667AbZKZUoS (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:44:18 -0500 Date: 26 Nov 2009 21:37:00 +0100 From: lirc@bartelmus.de (Christoph Bartelmus) To: mchehab@redhat.com Cc: dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com Cc: j@jannau.net Cc: jarod@redhat.com Cc: khc@pm.waw.pl Cc: linux-input@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org Cc: superm1@ubuntu.com Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4B0E765C.2080806@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [RFC] Should we create a raw input interface for IR's ? - Was: Re: [PATCH 1/3 v2] lirc core device driver infrastructure User-Agent: OpenXP/4.10.7369 (Linux) (i386) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+AzTYSKZXPaklhDHzKcjm9YgZaTl4nM77dFpD 9iTP0KBv+yFJTar92BWi/YEtH69dzMLAEDA6Qs+Ed5vox/dF1L hghiSCSoyjc11zGNzqVtvCA4PlOMmiG Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Mauro, on 26 Nov 09 at 10:36, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: [...] > lircd supports input layer interface. Yet, patch 3/3 exports both devices > that support only pulse/space raw mode and devices that generate scan > codes via the raw mode interface. It does it by generating artificial > pulse codes. Nonsense! There's no generation of artificial pulse codes in the drivers. The LIRC interface includes ways to pass decoded IR codes of arbitrary length to userspace. Christoph