Message-ID: <4B279017.3080303@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:33:11 -0200
From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090609)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
CC: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
       Krzysztof Halasa <khc@pm.waw.pl>, Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@gmail.com>,
       hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de>,
       Christoph Bartelmus <lirc@bartelmus.de>, 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?
References: <BEJgSGGXqgB@lirc> <9e4733910912041628g5bedc9d2jbee3b0861aeb5511@mail.gmail.com> <1260070593.3236.6.camel@pc07.localdom.local> <20091206065512.GA14651@core.coreip.homeip.net> <4B1B99A5.2080903@redhat.com> <m3638k6lju.fsf@intrepid.localdomain> <9e4733910912060952h4aad49dake8e8486acb6566bc@mail.gmail.com> <m3skbn6dv1.fsf@intrepid.localdomain> <20091207184153.GD998@core.coreip.homeip.net> <4B24DABA.9040007@redhat.com> <20091215115011.GB1385@ucw.cz>
In-Reply-To: <20091215115011.GB1385@ucw.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 5319
Lines: 126

Pavel Machek wrote:
>>> 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

Well, we need those changes anyway for the in-kernel drivers, and I'm not seeing
on the current patches any reason for not having them for 2.6.34.

I've added all the ir-core patches I did so far at linux-next. This helps people
to review and contribute.

The patches are already working with the in-kernel em28xx driver, allowing to
replace the keycode table and the protocol used by the hardware IR decoder.
I tested here by replacing an RC-5 based IR table (Hauppauge Grey) by a NEC
based IR table (Terratec Cinergy XS remote controller).

The current Remote Controller core module (ir-core) is currently doing:

	- Implementation of the existing EVIO[G|S]KEYCODE, expanding/feeing memory
dynamically, based on the needed size for scancode/keycode table;

	- scancodes can be up to 16 bits currently;

	- sysfs is registering /sys/class/irrcv and creating one branch for each
different RC receiver, numbering from irrcv0 to irrcv255;

	- one irrcv note is created: current_protocol;

	- reading /sys/class/irrcv/irrcv*/current_protocol returns the protocol
currently used by the driver;

	- writing to /sys/class/irrcv/irrcv*/current_protocol changes the protocol
to a new one, by calling a callback, asking the driver to change the protocol. If
the protocol is not support, it returns -EINVAL;

	- all V4L drivers are already using ir-core;

	- em28xx driver is implementing current_protocol show/store support.

TODO:
 	1) Port DVB drivers to use ir-core, removing the duplicated (and incomplete
          - as table size can't change on DVB's implementation) code that exists there;

	2) add current_protocol support on other drivers;

	3) link the corresponding input/evdev interfaces with /sys/class/irrcv/irrcv*;

	4) make the keytable.c application aware of the sysfs vars;

	5) add an attribute to uniquely identify a remote controller;

	6) write or convert an existing application to load IR tables at runtime;

	7) get the complete 16-bit scancodes used by V4L drivers;

	8) add decoder/lirc_dev glue to ir-core;

	9) add lirc_dev module and in-kernel decoders;

	10) extend keycode table replacement to support big/variable sized scancodes;

	11) rename IR->RC;

	12) redesign or remove ir-common module. It currently handles in-kernel
            keycode tables and a few helper routines for raw pulse/space decode;

	13) move drivers/media/IR to a better place;


comments:

	Tasks (1) to (6) for sure can happen to 2.6.34, depending on people's spare
time for it;

	(7) is probably the more complex task, since it requires to re-test all in-kernel
supported remote controlle scancode/keycode tables, to get the complete IR keycode
and rewrite the getkeycode functions that are currently masking the IR code into 7 bits. 
We'll need users help on this task, but this can be done gradually, like I did with
two RC keytables on em28xx driver, while preserving the other keytables as-is.

	(8) I suggest that this glue will be submitted together with lirc_dev patch
series, as the biggest client for it is lirc. In principle, kfifo seems the better
interface for lirc_dev -> decoders interface. For the decoders -> RC core interface,
there's an interface already used on V4L drivers, provided by ir-common, using evdev
kernel API. This may need some review.

	(9) depends on lirc API discusions. My proposal is that people submit an RFC
with the lirc API reviewed to the ML's, for people to ack/nack/comment. After that, 
re-submit the lirc_dev module integrating it into ir-core and with the reviewed API;

	(10) depends on EVIO[G|S]KEYCODE discussions we've already started. I did a proposal
about it. I'll review, based on the comments and re-submit it;

	(11) if none is against renaming IR as RC, I'll do it on a next patch;

	(12) depends on having lirc_dev added, for the removal of ir-functions.c. With
respect to the keytables, maybe one interesting alternative is to use a logic close to
nls tables that exists at fs, allowing to individually insert or remove an IR keytable
in-kernel.

	(13) has low priority. While not finishing the DVB integration with RC core
and reviewing the remaining bits of the ir-common module.

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/