Re: [RFC] What are the goals for the architecture of an in-kernel IR system?

David Härdeman
2010-03-30T11:10:03Z

On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 08:22:31PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> I also noticed another problem: kernel should have some way to report
> the expected
> size of the scancode to userspace, especially if we want to have the compatibility
> code (since, with compat, a scancode maximum size need to be 32 bits, otherwise
> the code won't work).
>
> I'll likely adding another control that returns the size of the scancode.

And perhaps the interface should explicitly define that for the case
where userspace sends an undersized scancode, the real scancode will be
generated by zero-extending the undersized scancode into its expected
size.

That way the interface will be binary-forwards-compatible even if
scancode sizes are increased at some later date.

--
David Härdeman