From: Antti Palosaari <crope@iki.fi>
To: Olli Salonen <olli.salonen@iki.fi>, CrazyCat <crazycat69@narod.ru>
Cc: linux-media <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] tuners: si2157: Si2148 support.
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:02:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <546732BA.8010008@iki.fi> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAZRmGw=uLyS+enctwq0To8Gc1dAeG6EZgE+t0v80gBEXg=H5A@mail.gmail.com>
On 11/15/2014 12:41 PM, Olli Salonen wrote:
> What about defining the firmware for Si2148-A20, but since the file is
> the same as Si2158-A20 just point to the same file?
>
> #define SI2148_A20_FIRMWARE "dvb-tuner-si2158-a20-01.fw"
>
> Then if Si2158-A20 would in the future get a new firmware that would
> not work with Si2148, this would not break Si2148.
Assuming you rename possible new firmware:
dvb-tuner-si2158-a20-01.fw
dvb-tuner-si2158-a20-02.fw ?
Basically, you would not like to rename firmware when it is updated if
it is compatible with the driver. Lets say firmware gets bug fixes, just
introduce new firmware with same name. If driver changes are needed,
then you have to rename it. These firmware changes are always
problematic as you have to think possible regression - it is regression
from the user point of view if kernel driver updates but it does not
work as firmware incompatibility.
How about Si2146 firmware you are working?
All-in-all, with the current situation and knowledge I have, I see it is
better to define new firmware name for that chip model and revision like
the others. Just to make life it easier in a case Si2148-A20 and
Si2158-A20 firmwares will be different on some case on some day. So lets
implement it that way or explain some possible problem we could meet
when defining own firmware file name.
> Another point that came to my mind is that we start to have quite a
> list of chips there in the printouts (Si2147/Si2148/Si2157/Si2158) and
> more is coming - I'm working with an Si2146 device currently. Should
> we just say "Si214x/Si215x" there or something?
I have no opinion.
regards
Antti
>
> Cheers,
> -olli
>
> On 15 November 2014 03:22, CrazyCat <crazycat69@narod.ru> wrote:
>> 2148 is 2158 without analog support. Same firmware.
>>
>> 15.11.2014, 03:02, "Antti Palosaari" <crope@iki.fi>:
>>> I wonder if we should define own firmware for Si2148-A20 just for sure.
>>> Olli?
--
http://palosaari.fi/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-15 11:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-14 21:19 [PATCH 1/3] tuners: si2157: Si2148 support CrazyCat
2014-11-15 1:01 ` Antti Palosaari
2014-11-15 1:22 ` CrazyCat
2014-11-15 1:36 ` Antti Palosaari
2014-11-15 10:41 ` Olli Salonen
2014-11-15 11:02 ` Antti Palosaari [this message]
2014-11-15 12:33 ` Olli Salonen
[not found] <CA++x_yD6oxb4mkbP_8UtHU13LM5dgacbtHXWKe+qpDEfFp5bMw@mail.gmail.com>
2014-11-17 16:10 ` Michael Holzer
2014-11-20 20:10 ` Olli Salonen
2014-11-20 21:07 ` CrazyCat
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=546732BA.8010008@iki.fi \
--to=crope@iki.fi \
--cc=crazycat69@narod.ru \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olli.salonen@iki.fi \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).