On Wednesday 14 April 2004 15:31, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > I have some doubts about the current V4 CI API draft. > > I still think that the ioctl/message style is easier to > understand than the read/write approach. But I think > that it is better to handle multiple slots in one > CI device and pass the slot number explicitly, just > like in the V3 API.
It would probably make it easier from a driver point of view.. certainly if the budget-ci supported multiple slots, both of them would be competing for the same hardware interface. It adds a little complication to userspace code, but nothing particularly bad.... and it does reflect how the actual hardware on the card is implemented. > IIRC it was also discussed on the list that we need to > support different CI message protocols, like link layer > and transport layer (or maybe even more). True? Ralph Metzler said this was necessary for cards which operate at a higher protocol level.... I think it might have been the Twinhan cards that are like this. Also, I suppose Convergence might still use the descriptor interface in their internal developments. -- Info: To unsubscribe send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe linux-dvb" as subject.
