On Mon, 2009-07-20 at 14:51 -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: > On Sunday 19 July 2009 09:38:54 Jean Delvare wrote: > > > 3. When using the new i2c binding model, I opted not to use ir_video for > > > the Z8F0811 loaded with microcode from Zilog/Hauppauge. Since I needed > > > one name for Rx binding and one for Tx binding, I used these names: > > > > > > "ir_tx_z8f0811_haup" > > > "ir_rx_z8f0811_haup" > > > > > > [Which is ir_(func)_(part number)_(firmware_oem)]. It made sense to me. > > > I assume these are the names to which ir-kbd-i2c and lirc_* will have to > > > bind. Is that correct? > > > > Yes, this is correct, and the approach is good. Ideally the "ir_video" > > type would not exist (or would go away over time) and we would have a > > separate type name for each IR chip, resulting in much cleaner code. > > The reason for the current implementation is solely historical. > > Cool. When fixing up lirc_i2c, I actually *did* have a question about > that which I forgot about until reading this. The only name I could > find in use anywhere at a glance was ir_video, so that's what lirc_i2c > is set to hook up to for the moment, but yeah, device-specific names > instead would be great.
Yes, I noted "ir_video" implied an IR receiver, but the IR blaster on the HVR-1600 and newer PVR-150's can't be called "ir_video" and have lirc_zilog do the right thing obviously. So "in for a penny, in for a pound..." Based on earlier posts from Jean, note that for microcontrollers the chip part number is not enough to uniquely identify the IR implementation since the firmware can be different. I used the name "haup" to distinguish a Z8F0811 loaded with firmware from Hauppauge/Zilog. Given reports from users using lirc_pvr150, the different versions of firmware loaded into th Z8F0811 chips on the Hauppaugue boards all seem to be compatable to some degree. Plus the IR program firmware can report its exact version if needed. > Hrm. Offhand, I don't have a clue what the > actual IR chip is on the PVR-x50 series, There are a few different IR chips on the PVR-x50 series AFAIK. I know that if you find one sitting at 0x71 on the PVR-x50's, then it's likely a Zilog Z8 Encore! family microcontroller loaded with firmware program that probably originates from Zilog. (A Zilog EULA comes with the Hauppauge Windows drivers.) Actually the Zilog Z8 chips respond to 0x70: blaster, 0x71 receiver, 0x72 ???, 0x73 ??? I was kind of hoping that addresses 0x72 and 0x73 might support some sort of "raw mode" or "learning mode", so I could to avoid the whole lirc_zilog "firmware image" mess. But I haven't had time to expriment. Regards, Andy > let alone any of the other > cards lirc_i2c claims to support... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
