Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753164AbZKZWHx (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Nov 2009 17:07:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753128AbZKZWHx (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Nov 2009 17:07:53 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:33228 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752884AbZKZWHw (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Nov 2009 17:07:52 -0500 Message-ID: <4B0EFC30.80208@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 20:07:44 -0200 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090609) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Krzysztof Halasa CC: Jarod Wilson , Dmitry Torokhov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mario Limonciello , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, Janne Grunau , 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 References: <200910200956.33391.jarod@redhat.com> <200910200958.50574.jarod@redhat.com> <4B0A765F.7010204@redhat.com> <4B0A81BF.4090203@redhat.com> <4B0AC65C.806@redhat.com> <4B0E765C.2080806@redhat.com> <4B0ED238.6060306@redhat.com> <4B0EED7D.90204@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1578 Lines: 43 Krzysztof Halasa wrote: > Mauro Carvalho Chehab writes: > >> No. All the other API functions there work with 32 bits for scancodes. > > We don't need them, do we? We need a new ioctl for changing key mappings > anyway (a single ioctl for setting the whole table I think), and we can > have arbitrary length of scan codes there. Why do you want to replace everything into a single shot? Had you ever tried to replace a scancode table with the current API? $ wc ./keycodes/dib0700_rc_keys 216 432 3541 ./keycodes/dib0700_rc_keys This is the biggest table we have: 216 scancodes. It has codes for several different IR's bound together into the same table. Let's replace the entire table (tested on a dib8076 reference design device): $ time ./keytable ./keycodes/dib0700_rc_keys real 0m0.029s user 0m0.000s sys 0m0.027s Don't you think that 29ms to replace 216 codes to be fast enough, especially since you only need to do it once after plugging a device? Also, if you want to control your device with two different IR controllers, the better is to allow adding new keycodes there, instead of just allowing the replacement of the entire table. Maybe we'll need some extensions there, for example to extend the size of the dynamic table, but I don't see any timing issue here. Cheers, Mauro -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/