From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-fx0-f213.google.com ([209.85.220.213]:63863 "EHLO mail-fx0-f213.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752249AbZK1Pf7 (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Nov 2009 10:35:59 -0500 Subject: Re: [RFC] What are the goals for the architecture of an in-kernel IR system? From: Maxim Levitsky To: Krzysztof Halasa Cc: Stefan Richter , Jon Smirl , Christoph Bartelmus , jarod@wilsonet.com, awalls@radix.net, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, j@jannau.net, jarod@redhat.com, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, mchehab@redhat.com, superm1@ubuntu.com In-Reply-To: References: <9e4733910911270757j648e39ecl7487b7e6c43db828@mail.gmail.com> <4B104971.4020800@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <1259370501.11155.14.camel@maxim-laptop> <1259419368.18747.0.camel@maxim-laptop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 17:35:59 +0200 Message-ID: <1259422559.18747.6.camel@maxim-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, 2009-11-28 at 16:25 +0100, Krzysztof Halasa wrote: > Maxim Levitsky writes: > > >> And that's good. Especially for a popular and simple protocol such as > >> RC5. > >> Actually, it's not about adding the decoder. It's about fixing it. > >> I can fix it. > > > > This is nonsense. > > You forgot to say why do you think so. Because frankly, I am sick of this discussion. Generic decoder that lirc has is actually much better and more tolerant that protocol specific decoders that you propose, You claim you 'fix' the decoder, right? But what about all these lirc userspace drivers? How they are supposed to use that 'fixed' decoder.