[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091215114712.GA1385@ucw.cz>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 12:47:13 +0100
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: Christoph Bartelmus <lirc@...telmus.de>
Cc: dmitry.torokhov@...il.com, awalls@...ix.net,
hermann-pitton@...or.de, j@...nau.net, jarod@...hat.com,
jarod@...sonet.com, jonsmirl@...il.com, khc@...waw.pl,
kraxel@...hat.com, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
mchehab@...hat.com, superm1@...ntu.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] What are the goals for the architecture of an in-kernel
IR system?
On Sun 2009-12-06 12:59:00, Christoph Bartelmus wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> on 05 Dec 09 at 22:55, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> [...]
> > I do not believe you are being realistic. Sometimes we just need to say
> > that the device is a POS and is just not worth it. Remember, there is
> > still "lirc hole" for the hard core people still using solder to produce
> > something out of the spare electronic components that may be made to
> > work (never mind that it causes the CPU constantly poll the device, not
> > letting it sleep and wasting electricity as a result - just hypotetical
> > example here).
>
> The still seems to be is a persistent misconception that the home-brewn
> receivers need polling or cause heavy CPU load. No they don't. All of them
> are IRQ based.
I have at least one that needs polling/signal
processing... somewhere. IR LED connected to mic input.
Anyway, clearly hacked-up devices like that are better left for
userland solutions.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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