[linux-dvb] [PATCH] Combined support for NXT2002 and NXT2004 based cards

[Todd Ignasiak]

Has anyone tried the ATI HDTV Wonder with QAM?

I don't think they enable QAM in their Windows software (or in XP
MCE), so QAM support under Linux would be really cool.


On 10/26/05, Michael Krufky <mkrufky at m1k.net> wrote:
> Kirk Lapray wrote:
>
> > This patch replaces the nxt2002 driver with a nxt200x driver that
> > supports the NXT2002 and adds support for the NXT2004. I don't have a
> > NXT2002 based card so this new driver will have to be tested to make
> > sure it works.  This driver will also need to be tested on a AverTVHD
> > MCE A180, another NXT2004 based card.
> >
> > * build-2.6/Makefile:
> > - Switched from nxt2002 to nxt200x
> >
> > * get_dvb_firmware:
> > - Added support for the NXT2004 firmware. This was originally written
> > by Jean-Francois Thibert
> >   This firmware also works with the ATI HDTV Wonder. I know where to
> > get the ATI firmware,
> >   but the files are not able to be extracted in Linux (NSIS
> > self-extracting file) and I don't know the legality of
> >   including the firmware in CVS.
> >
> > * flexcop-fe-tuner.c:
> > - Switched from using the nxt2002 driver to the nxt200x driver
> >
> > * Kconfig:
> > - Switched from nxt2002 to nxt200x
> >
> > * frontends/Makefile
> > - Switched from nxt2002 to nxt200x
> >
> > * dvb-pll.c
> > - Fixed minimum frequency for tuv1236d. It seems that the data sheets
> > are wrong.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kirk Lapray <kirk.lapray at gmail.com
> > <mailto:kirk.lapray at gmail.com>>
>
> Kirk-
>
> Thank you for the patches.  I think we should handle this in 2 steps:
>
> 1) Add nxt200x module (and apply the v4l-kernel patch).  (somewhat, but
> not totally trivial... we'll talk about it on the v4l list)
>
> 2) I don't think that we should deprecate the nxt2002 module until after
> testing the module with the flexcop driver (for compatability).
>
> The module looks good to me, overall, but I have some questions:
>
> diff -u -r1.12 flexcop-fe-tuner.c
> --- linux/drivers/media/dvb/b2c2/flexcop-fe-tuner.c    15 Oct 2005
> 17:48:57 -0000    1.12
> +++ linux/drivers/media/dvb/b2c2/flexcop-fe-tuner.c    23 Oct 2005
> 21:18:51 -0000
> @@ -343,9 +343,10 @@
>      .clock_polarity_flip = 1,
>  };
>
> -static struct nxt2002_config samsung_tbmv_config = {
> +static struct nxt200x_config samsung_tbmv_config = {
>      .demod_address    = 0x0a,
> -    .request_firmware = flexcop_fe_request_firmware,
> +    .pll_address      = 0xc2,
> +    .pll_desc        = &dvb_pll_tbmv30111in,
>  };
>
>
> This doesn't look right to me... Shouldn't it be:
> +    .pll_address      = 0x61,
>
> Regardless, we'll need this module tested in the flexcop driver before
> we can make this switch.
>
> More importantly, in nxt200x.c :
>
>     /* if pll is a Philips TUV1236D then write directly to tuner */
>     if (strcmp(state->config->pll_desc->name, "Philips TUV1236D") == 0) {
>             if (i2c_writebytes(state, state->config->pll_address, data, 4))
>                     printk(KERN_WARNING "nxt200x: error writing to
> tuner\n");
>         /* wait until we have a lock */
>         while (count < 20) {
>             i2c_readbytes(state, state->config->pll_address, &buf, 1);
>             if (buf & 0x40)
>                 return 0;
>             msleep(100);
>             count++;
>         }
>         printk("nxt200x: timeout waiting for tuner lock\n");
>         return 0;
>     } else {
>
>
> WHY???  Is special handling of this pll really necessary?
>
>
>     /* set additional params */
>     switch (p->u.vsb.modulation) {
>         case QAM_64:
>         case QAM_256:
>             /* Set punctured clock for QAM */
>             /* This is just a guess since I am unable to test it */
>             state->config->set_ts_params(fe, 1);
>
>             /* set to use cable input */
>             buf[3] |= 0x08;
>             break;
>         case VSB_8:
>             /* Set non-punctured clock for VSB */
>             state->config->set_ts_params(fe, 0);
>             break;
>         default:
>             return -EINVAL;
>             break;
>     }
>
> :-/  QAM256 is what I was using to test on the AVerTVHD 180 ... Now I
> see that it might not be perfect yet... Once I figure out what's going
> on in the AVerTVHD card, maybe I can look into this further...
> Meanwhile, I think we should do a check to be sure this callback is
> defined before we call it.  I'm not sure that this is going to work
> correctly on the saa7135-based AVerTVHD card.
>
> So, these concerns that I have above are NOT considered showstoppers in
> my mind.  IMHO, I think it is safe to add this to cvs, but to keep
> nxt2002 around until we can test this more.  That's all I have time for
> right now... Maybe we'll hear some comments from some other people.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Michael Krufky
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-dvb mailing list
> linux-dvb at linuxtv.org
> http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
>