[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <83224BA3-A5FF-4525-BF20-16A60F865C0A@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 13:29:37 -0800
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To: Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@...il.com>
Cc: Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>, Andy Walls <awalls@...ix.net>,
Christoph Bartelmus <lirc@...telmus.de>,
"j@...nau.net" <j@...nau.net>,
"jarod@...hat.com" <jarod@...hat.com>,
"jarod@...sonet.com" <jarod@...sonet.com>,
"linux-input@...r.kernel.org" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-media@...r.kernel.org" <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
"maximlevitsky@...il.com" <maximlevitsky@...il.com>,
"mchehab@...hat.com" <mchehab@...hat.com>,
"stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de" <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>,
"superm1@...ntu.com" <superm1@...ntu.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] What are the goals for the architecture of an in-kernel IR system?
On Nov 29, 2009, at 12:44 PM, Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@...il.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>
> wrote:
>> 1. Do we agree that a lirc (-style) kernel-user interface is needed
>> at
>> least?
>>
>> 2. Is there any problem with lirc kernel-user interface?
>
> Can you consider sending the raw IR data as a new evdev message type
> instead of creating a new device protocol?
No, I think it would be wrong. Such events are ill-suited for
consumption by regular applications and would introduce the "looping"
interface I described in my other email.
> evdev protects the messages in a transaction to stop incomplete
> messages from being read.
If such property is desired we can add it to the new lirc-like
interface, can't we?
--
>
Dmitry
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists