Hi, On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 07:31:30PM +0100, I wrote: > Ralph Metzler wrote: > > > > - Move the memory frontends to separate devices. > > Either also call them frontend with type memory frontend > > or call them memfrontend, mfrontend, dvrin, ... whatever > > They should offer mmap, write, etc. maybe even a software controlled > > rate control (some chips have it in hardware) to allow for decent > > non-blocking writing. > > Each demuxN can select which frontend (no matter if real or memory) > > to use as input. > > I seen that you've already defined FE_MEMORY and FE_NET in your > version of the API header files. > > I for one would be happy with a /dev/.../frontend of type FE_MEMORY. > How do we handle capabilites, i.e. if we can feed TS, PS and/or AVPES > into the frontend? Is this handled by the demux that we connect to > the frontend?
I've thought about this, and now I think that it's no a good idea, because none of the ioctls for "normal" frontend devices apply to "memory frontends", ecept FE_GET_INFO. I think it would be better to have a dedicated "input" device for the demux, which would then support write() and possbly mmap(). Regards, Johannes -- Info: To unsubscribe send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe linux-dvb" as subject.