From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Message-ID: <48F640DA.7060009@linuxtv.org> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 21:13:30 +0200 From: Andreas Oberritter MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steven Toth References: <466109.26020.qm@web46101.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <23602.1221904652@kewl.org> <48D51000.3060006@linuxtv.org> <25577.1221924224@kewl.org> <20080921234339.18450@gmx.net> <8002.1222068668@kewl.org> <20080922124908.203800@gmx.net> <10822.1222089271@kewl.org> <48D7C15E.5060509@linuxtv.org> <20080922164108.203780@gmx.net> <20022.1222162539@kewl.org> <20080923142509.86330@gmx.net> <4025.1222264419@kewl.org> <4284.1222265835@kewl.org> <20080925145223.47290@gmx.net> <18599.1222354652@kewl.org> <21180.1223610119@kewl.org> <20081010132352.273810@gmx.net> <48EF7E78.6040102@linuxtv.org> <30863.1223711672@kewl.org> <48F0AA35.6020005@linuxtv.org> <773.1223732259@kewl.org> <48F0AEA3.50704@linuxtv.org> <989.1223733525@kewl.org> <48F0B6C5.5090505@linuxtv.org> <1506.1223737964@kewl.org> <48F0E516.303@linuxtv.org> <20081011190015.175420@gmx.net> <48F36B32.5060006@linuxtv.org> <48F42D5C.7090908@linuxtv.org> <48F4B366.7050508@linuxtv.org> In-Reply-To: <48F4B366.7050508@linuxtv.org> Cc: Hans Werner , fabbione@fabbione.net, linux-dvb , scarfoglio@arpacoop.it Subject: Re: [linux-dvb] Multi-frontend patch merge (TESTERS FEEDBACK) was: Re: [PATCH] S2API: add multifrontend List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-dvb-bounces@linuxtv.org Errors-To: linux-dvb-bounces+mchehab=infradead.org@linuxtv.org List-ID: Steven Toth wrote: > A good example of this in the current kernel (without any MFE patches) > is the current cx23885 driver, that registers adapter0 and adapter1 with > two different ATSC frontends. I question (and argue) that it should > really be /dev/dvb/adapter0/demux{0,1} Did you mean frontend{0,1} here? > The same is also true for the for the multi-frontend patches, it should > probably change (as part of an overall adapterX overhaul) to match the > LinuxTV DVB API and register only one demux device. > > That's a much larger project, and has not been addressed yet. Many users > will probably also argue that it's unimportant work, when application > are currently working. > > My opinion is that we would review the adapter usage and determine > whether we need or want to change that. If we do change it we should > probably add some better application interfaces from the adapter inode - > In a model similar to the S2API has done for frontends. Applications > would then be able to query board specific details in a way that cannot > be easily done now. Yes, such an interface is definitely missing. > However, regardless of my opinions, it would be a mistake to hold back a > merge of the current multi-frontend patches. Instead, we should merge > the large number of MFE patches and start a larger adapter level > discussion and slowly evolve with smaller patches. (We'll need someone > to draft an RFC). There's no need to hold back the merge. Even if someone decides to change the code to match the DVB API later, then it wouldn't be a change to the API itself. (Or is there any change being done to the user interface now?) Application developers can already add support for DMX_SET_SOURCE now. > Are you volunteering to address this larger subject? No. Regards, Andreas _______________________________________________ linux-dvb mailing list linux-dvb@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb