Mailing List archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[linux-dvb] Re: cinergyT2: which kernel/usb module to use?
Ralph Metzler wrote:
> Johannes Stezenbach writes:
> > The whole issue could be trivially fixed by converting cinergyT2
> > to use the dvb_frontend core, as *all* other frontends do.
> > I would volunteer to do that, however I won't unless Holger
> > gives me an OK -- I guess he had some reasons not to use
> > dvb_frontend.
>
> I don't know his reasons but for some frontends you just do
> not need/want the whole dvb_frontend stuff, especially if it
> is changing every few weeks.
It isn't changing every few weeks. It changed once during
restructuring. (Unless you count the intermediate restructure
attempts, but you didn't have to follow those.)
> I am also not using it for Twinhan cards myself.
Why? It won't be more code to use dvb_frontend.
So, what's the problem?
> Maybe dvb_frontend should just export some message queue handling
> calls.
It is unnecessary. See above.
> Regardless of all this, an application should handle getting an
> EINVAL or ENOTSUPP from FE_GET_EVENT.
The API (as documented) requires frontends to implement FE_GET_EVENT.
Why should we want to break this?
Johannes
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index