Hello Rico, On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Rico Tzschichholz <ric...@t-online.de> wrote: > Hello Manu, > >> Actually, quite a lot of effort was put in to get that part right. It >> does the reverse thing that's to be done. >> The revamped version is here [1] If the issue persists still, then it >> needs to be investigated further. >> >> [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/linuxtv-commits@linuxtv.org/msg09214.html > > I am not sure how this is related to stb6100? > > Does that mean the current stb0899 patch [2] isnt ready to be proposed > for 2.6.39 yet? Or does the stb6100 patch has a better design to solve > this issue which should be adapted for stb0899 then? > I was hoping to see it included before the merge window is closed again. > > [2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/244201/
stb0899 is a channel decoder (or demodulator in other words) while the stb6100 is a tuner which provides I-Q components to the demod. When a tuner locks to a transponder, in the spectrum in the absence of a signal, it will be contain White (Gaussian) noise. In such a case the demod has a hard time to lock to the signal. In this particular case, we had a bit of luck additionally, ie we found a case where the stb0899 demodulator functioned perfectly well with another tuner, but with the same hardware configuration. This helped in narrowing the bug to the tuner and hence the fix. The one in patchwork, does modify the step size but that doesn't reduce the white noise, which is something like a lucky dip. (similar to what Bjorn pointed out in another post.) I am not really sure whether modifying the step size of any benefit/disadvantage, but need to do some research on that aspect. Best Regards, Manu ] -- 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
