Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933706AbZLFLXM (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Dec 2009 06:23:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933673AbZLFLXL (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Dec 2009 06:23:11 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:21157 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933672AbZLFLXK (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Dec 2009 06:23:10 -0500 Message-ID: <4B1B9416.809@redhat.com> Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2009 09:23:02 -0200 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090609) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dmitry Torokhov CC: Gerd Hoffmann , Jarod Wilson , Christoph Bartelmus , awalls@radix.net, j@jannau.net, jarod@redhat.com, jonsmirl@gmail.com, khc@pm.waw.pl, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, superm1@ubuntu.com Subject: Re: [RFC] What are the goals for the architecture of an in-kernel IR system? References: <4B14EDE3.5050201@redhat.com> <4B1524DD.3080708@redhat.com> <4B153617.8070608@redhat.com> <4B17AA6A.9060702@redhat.com> <20091203175531.GB776@core.coreip.homeip.net> <20091203163328.613699e5@pedra> <20091204100642.GD22570@core.coreip.homeip.net> <20091204121234.5144836b@pedra> <20091206071450.GC14651@core.coreip.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <20091206071450.GC14651@core.coreip.homeip.net> 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: 2226 Lines: 54 Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 12:12:34PM -0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: >>> How related lirc-core to the current lirc code? If it is not the same >>> maybe we should not call it lirc to avoid confusion. >> Just for better illustrate what I'm seeing, I broke the IR generic >> code into two components: >> >> lirc core - the module that receives raw pulse/space and creates >> a device to receive raw API pulse/space events; >> >> IR core - the module that receives scancodes, convert them into >> keycodes and send via evdev interface. >> >> We may change latter the nomenclature, but I'm seeing the core as two different >> modules, since there are cases where lirc core won't be used (those >> devices were there's no way to get pulse/space events). >> > > OK, I think we are close but not exactly close. I believe that what you > call lirc core will be used always - it is the code that create3s class > devices, connectes decorers with the data streams, etc. I believe it > will be utilized even in case of devices using hardware decoders. That > is why we should probably stop calling it "lirc core" just tso we don't > confuse it with original lirc. > > Then we have decoders and lirc_dev - which implements original lirc > interface (or maybe its modified version) and allows lircd to continue > working. > > Lastly we have what you call IR core which is IR-to-input bridge of > sorts. It seems to be just nomenclacure ;) what I called "IR core" you called "lirc core" what I called "lirc core" you called "lirc_dev" What I called IR core is the one that will be used by every IR driver, handling sysfs, evdev's, calling decoders, etc. I opted to use the nomenclature Lirc to the part of the IR subsystem that will create the Lirc interface. Currently, I almost finished the evdev part of the "IR core", using the current API to control the dynamic keycode allocation. It is already working fine with V4L drivers. 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/