Re: Potentially dead bttv cards from 2.6.10

2005-03-04 Thread James Bruce
As a final update, I added the third card to another machine and that doesn't work either. So after trying 3 kernels on two machines with either one or two cards, and trying the ~120 different card options for bttv to no avail, I'll just guess this card isn't actually supported right now. The

Re: Potentially dead bttv cards from 2.6.10

2005-03-01 Thread Bill Davidsen
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, James Bruce wrote: > Sorry, I wasn't clear in the previous email; I did try the card= option > anyway. I wrote a looping script and tested first 70 card= options, and > none worked properly for streaming capture. Some did show different > behavior though. I might try the

Re: Potentially dead bttv cards from 2.6.10

2005-03-01 Thread Gerd Knorr
> I did notice one strange thing though; the card= option is only applied > to the first bttv card. All remaining cards in the system are still > autodetected (which ends up assuming card=0 in my case). Not sure if > this is the intended behavior or not, since someone really could run two > d

Re: Potentially dead bttv cards from 2.6.10

2005-03-01 Thread James Bruce
Sorry, I wasn't clear in the previous email; I did try the card= option anyway. I wrote a looping script and tested first 70 card= options, and none worked properly for streaming capture. Some did show different behavior though. I might try the remaining 50 later today. I did notice one stra

Re: Potentially dead bttv cards from 2.6.10

2005-03-01 Thread Paulo Marques
James Bruce wrote: [...] The card= option didn't help in my case since my card is not in the list; For thess cards we went off the reccomendation of other people doing machine vision in Linux; Next time I guess we'll go name brand again... I think you should try it anyway, using all the options,

Re: Potentially dead bttv cards from 2.6.10

2005-03-01 Thread James Bruce
Forgive me for being annoying; I'm trying to be careful because I get one more failure in a test and then that's it. The manufacturer no longer lists that model as being produced. Thus if there's a way to ruin a bttv card through the V4L2 interface I will no longer be of any assistance in fin

Re: Potentially dead bttv cards from 2.6.10

2005-03-01 Thread Gerd Knorr
James Bruce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If you could suggest a very well tested kernel for bttv (2.6.9?), What do you expect? With just one single report and not remotely being clear what exactly caused it ... > I've heard that there is some way to dump eeproms; Is there a way to > write them

Re: Potentially dead bttv cards from 2.6.10

2005-02-28 Thread James Bruce
I don't think it was a line spike since one of the video cards that went bad didn't have a video cable attached to it. It could be the computer, but that one hasn't given us a problem for the almost five years we've had it. If I did cause it though with my "buggy program of doom", that should

Re: Potentially dead bttv cards from 2.6.10

2005-02-28 Thread James Bruce
Thanks for the hints. Unfortunately the cards in question really are fairly generic and thus don't appear in the list. I tried the first 75 cards as insmod options (using a script of course), and some of them are different, but none work properly. I am lucky in that I still have a spare. If

Re: Potentially dead bttv cards from 2.6.10

2005-02-28 Thread Bill Davidsen
James Bruce wrote: Well, are there any theories as to why it would work flawlessly, then after a hard lockup (due to what I think is a buggy V4L2 application), that the cards no longer work? That was with 2.6.10, but after they started failing I tried 2.6.11-rc5 and it doesn't work either. By

Re: Potentially dead bttv cards from 2.6.10

2005-02-28 Thread Gerd Knorr
> I remember something about that you shouldn't use the teletext-decoder > at the same time as viewing regular tv. That would damage the eeprom. > Maybe it is related? No. Thats (a) very old and about two drivers banging on the bt848 card at the same time, where the second doesn't even exist for

Re: Potentially dead bttv cards from 2.6.10

2005-02-28 Thread Folkert van Heusden
> > Well, are there any theories as to why it would work flawlessly, then > > after a hard lockup (due to what I think is a buggy V4L2 application), > > that the cards no longer work? > No idea why the eeprom doesn't respond any more. Maybe it's really > broken. Note that the eeprom is read only

Re: Potentially dead bttv cards from 2.6.10

2005-02-28 Thread Gerd Knorr
James Bruce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Well, are there any theories as to why it would work flawlessly, then > after a hard lockup (due to what I think is a buggy V4L2 application), > that the cards no longer work? No idea why the eeprom doesn't respond any more. Maybe it's really broken. No

Re: Potentially dead bttv cards from 2.6.10

2005-02-28 Thread James Bruce
Well, are there any theories as to why it would work flawlessly, then after a hard lockup (due to what I think is a buggy V4L2 application), that the cards no longer work? That was with 2.6.10, but after they started failing I tried 2.6.11-rc5 and it doesn't work either. By the way, I sent th

Re: Potentially dead bttv cards from 2.6.10

2005-02-28 Thread Gerd Knorr
On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 11:57:49PM -0500, James Bruce wrote: > Hi I've read elsewhere that the following message: > "tveeprom(bttv internal): Huh, no eeprom present (err=-121)?" > Means that a bttv card is dead. Or i2c communication to the eeprom failed. There used to be some -mm kernels with e

Potentially dead bttv cards from 2.6.10

2005-02-25 Thread James Bruce
Hi I've read elsewhere that the following message: "tveeprom(bttv internal): Huh, no eeprom present (err=-121)?" Means that a bttv card is dead. If so, then I've apparently found a way to kill bttv cards in vanilla 2.6.10. They worked fine a few days ago, but after running some "cleaned up" u