[linux-dvb] [patch] Add support for different tuning algorithms
jhall at maoz.com
Tue Nov 15 19:44:21 CET 2005
In the new year, Felix Domke wrote:
> Manu Abraham wrote:
> > Initially we thought it would be best to do it in userspace, but the
> > addition of ioctls to the API, made that thought a bit diminished ..
> > This is applicable for most of the frontends though ..
> Hm, let's ask the other way around:
> What is the advantage of doing this in kernelspace?
If there are timing-sensitive events, kernelspace might traditionally be
more appropriate. If most of the work is with kernel driver structures,
kernel might be a good place to go.
Take alsa, for example. IT has the user space bits and the kernel/driver
> Can we:
> - guarantee that all frontends behave the same, so we had a real,
> device independent, API?
> - define an API which covers all possibilities (input ranges, ...), so
> we don't need additional, private IOCTLs?
> - pass results in a good way to the userspace? For example, a blocking
> read of a "frontend parameter" structure which returns new found
> transponders? Is this flexible enough?
Without fully understanding what the new requirements are, maybe this
would be a good idea for the next revision of the api (version 4 is it?)
that way people will have a need to use the newer api.
> linux-dvb mailing list
> linux-dvb at linuxtv.org
More information about the linux-dvb