Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754028AbZLAT1b (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Dec 2009 14:27:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752854AbZLAT1a (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Dec 2009 14:27:30 -0500 Received: from mail-qy0-f192.google.com ([209.85.221.192]:42716 "EHLO mail-qy0-f192.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752231AbZLAT13 (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Dec 2009 14:27:29 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=WNsUQTSGUPpiFqptkyp5+L9bWyoXKQpE2yY29F5RnfYb5REsW/wsxAHfaBVLizPieA /nIV20ezxcm+jX9IVh5Axfc4TIU0r8w8t2OSPEGFyRHKgPNgIUoVicztwgGFKrEEbu/V QPdHMoPyrlP2Qgbl0ql39Gu1eiGdUZsI5YXxo= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4B1567D8.7080007@redhat.com> References: <9e4733910912010708u1064e2c6mbc08a01293c3e7fd@mail.gmail.com> <1259682428.18599.10.camel@maxim-laptop> <9e4733910912010816q32e829a2uce180bfda69ef86d@mail.gmail.com> <4B154C54.5090906@redhat.com> <829197380912010909m59cb1078q5bd2e00af0368aaf@mail.gmail.com> <4B155288.1060509@redhat.com> <20091201175400.GA19259@core.coreip.homeip.net> <4B1567D8.7080007@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 14:27:35 -0500 Message-ID: <9e4733910912011127r4a40b75epf712006c47fe9061@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [RFC v2] Another approach to IR From: Jon Smirl To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab Cc: Dmitry Torokhov , Devin Heitmueller , Maxim Levitsky , awalls@radix.net, j@jannau.net, jarod@redhat.com, jarod@wilsonet.com, khc@pm.waw.pl, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, lirc-list@lists.sourceforge.net, superm1@ubuntu.com, Christoph Bartelmus Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1100 Lines: 25 On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Due to the lack of an API for it, each driver has their own way to handle the > protocols, but basically, on almost all drivers, even supporting different protocols, > the driver limits the usage of just the protocol provided by the shipped remote. > > To solve this, we really need to extend evdev API to do 3 things: enumberate the > supported protocols, get the current protocol(s), and select the protocol(s) that > will be used by a newer table. evdev capabilities bits can support enumerating the supported protocols. I'm not sure if you can write those bits back into evdev to turn a feature off/on. If not its something that could be added to evdev. I agree that there is no consistency in the existing driver implementations. -- Jon Smirl jonsmirl@gmail.com -- 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/