On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 02:41:21PM +0100, Holger Waechtler wrote: > Hi, > > at a first glance your code looks good but I didn't had the time to > analyze and test it more in detail. If some people report it working > without bugs I'd like to apply your patch. Johannes, Michael - what do > you think? Should we start an experimental branch for this or should > this go into the main trunk?
Wise desision, i will test it further, also I'd like to put to_right_place the #define MAX_SECBUFP 4096 or 16384, instead of having secbuf_real[4096 or 16384] > >+ u8 *secbuf; > >+ u8 secbuf_real[16384]; directy in the struct. Although we know the individual section is max 4096 bytes, I would like to be able to easily increase 2-4 times that buffer in case the transmission equipment goes amok and builds some larger chunks without PUSI, to still avoid loosing some section data. (in few tests so far I haven't seen building them over 4096 but..) Emard -- Info: To unsubscribe send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe linux-dvb" as subject.
