On 07/24/13 19:52, Antti Palosaari wrote:
On 07/24/2013 08:21 PM, Krishna Kishore wrote:
My opinion is that, it is better to have only stv090x. Apart from minimizing
the number of patches and ease of maintenance, it will avoid the confusion that
I had When I started using prof 7500. I had to enable stv0900 and stb6100. I
got confused on whether to enable stv0900 or to enable stv090x.
-----Original Message-----
From: linux-media-ow...@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:linux-media-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Chris Lee
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 10:09 PM
To: linux-media@vger.kernel.org
Subject: stv090x vs stv0900 support
Im looking for comments on these two modules, they overlap support for the same
demods. stv0900 supporting stv0900 and stv090x supporting
stv0900 and stv0903. Ive flipped a few cards from one to the other and they
function fine. In some ways stv090x is better suited. Its a pain supporting two
modules that are written differently but do the same thing, a fix in one almost
always means it has to be implemented in the other as well.
Im not necessarily suggesting dumping stv0900, but Id like to flip a few cards
that I own over to stv090x just to standardize it. The Prof
7301 and Prof 7500.
Whats everyones thoughts on this? It will cut the number of patch''s in half
when it comes to these demods. Ive got alot more coming lol :)
Chris
stv0900 is better separated from the tuner whilst stv090x has weird
stv6110x_devctl structure. That's why I used stv0900 for anysee driver.
I wonder is there something special supported by stv090x because normal
tuner/demod callbacks are not enough.
That's probably for the ddbridge driver, while ours is pretty old (0.5)
Ralph/oliver is working on 0.9 atm. 0.8.6 still uses the same structure
i think.
regards
Antti
--
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
