Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752696AbZK2RuI (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:50:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752305AbZK2RuG (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:50:06 -0500 Received: from mail-iw0-f171.google.com ([209.85.223.171]:64192 "EHLO mail-iw0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751654AbZK2RuF (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:50:05 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; b=W9KJxUkqAvJdQrpBjmyRW8nojnNIEoP2bjtEos3GWP59gZqkDXrvwrCUG4nGFr5dO9 8Hb4d9sWHgMwcmWhnwvbrd8f4zZGSt1HXE/9nGRq7luemOfenJKTKyXUnQRdw7JVU823 85D0Ei+MYvPOuiwiBwrHBZPX4Ls4ZxUyPMKqU= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1259515703.3284.11.camel@maxim-laptop> References: <9e4733910911280906if1191a1jd3d055e8b781e45c@mail.gmail.com> <9e4733910911280937k37551b38g90f4a60b73665853@mail.gmail.com> <1259469121.3125.28.camel@palomino.walls.org> <20091129124011.4d8a6080@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <1259515703.3284.11.camel@maxim-laptop> From: Ray Lee Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 09:49:51 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 11c93706f39d280b Message-ID: <2c0942db0911290949p89ae64bjc3c7501c2de6930c@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [RFC] What are the goals for the architecture of an in-kernel IR system? To: Maxim Levitsky Cc: Alan Cox , Andy Walls , Jon Smirl , Krzysztof Halasa , Christoph Bartelmus , dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, j@jannau.net, jarod@redhat.com, jarod@wilsonet.com, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, mchehab@redhat.com, stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de, superm1@ubuntu.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 733 Lines: 15 On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 9:28 AM, Maxim Levitsky wrote: > This has zero advantages besides good developer feeling that "My system > has one less daemon..." Surely it's clear that having an unnecessary daemon is introducing another point of failure? Reducing complexity is not just its own reward in a 'Developer Feel Good' way. If decoding can *only* be sanely handled in user-space, that's one thing. If it can be handled in kernel, then that would be better. -- 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/