Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760035AbZLOLu2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Dec 2009 06:50:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760000AbZLOLuW (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Dec 2009 06:50:22 -0500 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:39468 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760025AbZLOLuR (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Dec 2009 06:50:17 -0500 Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 12:50:11 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab Cc: Dmitry Torokhov , Krzysztof Halasa , Jon Smirl , hermann pitton , Christoph Bartelmus , awalls@radix.net, j@jannau.net, jarod@redhat.com, jarod@wilsonet.com, kraxel@redhat.com, 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? Message-ID: <20091215115011.GB1385@ucw.cz> References: <9e4733910912041628g5bedc9d2jbee3b0861aeb5511@mail.gmail.com> <1260070593.3236.6.camel@pc07.localdom.local> <20091206065512.GA14651@core.coreip.homeip.net> <4B1B99A5.2080903@redhat.com> <9e4733910912060952h4aad49dake8e8486acb6566bc@mail.gmail.com> <20091207184153.GD998@core.coreip.homeip.net> <4B24DABA.9040007@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B24DABA.9040007@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1896 Lines: 40 > > This sounds like "merge first, think later"... > > > > The question is why we need to merge lirc interface right now, before we > > agreed on the sybsystem architecture? Noone _in kernel_ user lirc-dev > > yet and, looking at the way things are shaping, no drivers will be > > _directly_ using it after it is complete. So, even if we merge it right > > away, the code will have to be restructured and reworked. Unfortunately, > > just merging what Jarod posted, will introduce sysfs hierarchy which > > is userspace interface as well (although we not as good maintaining it > > at times) and will add more constraints on us. > > > > That is why I think we should go the other way around - introduce the > > core which receivers could plug into and decoder framework and once it > > is ready register lirc-dev as one of the available decoders. > > > > I've committed already some IR restruct code on my linux-next -git tree: > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/mchehab/linux-next.git > > The code there basically moves the input/evdev registering code and > scancode/keycode management code into a separate ir-core module. > > To make my life easy, I've moved the code temporarily into drivers/media/IR. > This way, it helps me to move V4L specific code outside ir-core and to later > use it for DVB. After having it done, probably the better is to move it to > be under /drivers or /drivers/input. Well, -next is for stuff to be merged into 2.6.34. You are quite an optimist. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- 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/