[linux-dvb] Re: decoder & frontend ioctls

[Marcel Siegert <mws@renzel.net>]

On Wednesday 07 July 2004 20:15, Marcus Metzler wrote:
> >>>>> "Marcel" == Marcel Siegert <mws@renzel.net> writes:
> 
>     Marcel> Hi, can someone explain why DVB ApiV3 is not providing
>     Marcel> IOCTL's for getting e.g.
> 
>     Marcel> the bitrate of the stream, resolution ect. ?
> What bitrate?
Your are right, I was thinking e.g. about PES bitrates.
Also on H by V resolution ect.

In my special case i have got a /proc/bus/bitstream interface which is filled with data
within the driver code, because the HW is supporting these data.

On a second (but different Model) STB it is the same interface.

While I do not know exactly if dvb-s cards can measure these things in hw or if there are registers
which can be read on DVB-S i must/would have to implement it in a different way (Filter...).

My suggestion was to have a api command to get a structure. if the driver supports 
to provide me with these info i would have a simplified interface to get this information.

if a driver does not support these things - maybe caused by hw reasons - it still could 
provide the application with an -EINVAL or -ENOSUP reply.
This prevents me and other people to implement the same stuff more than once.
Isn't that what API's are for? To get standards and standard code only implemented ONE time?

If not i may understand your reply to my question, but i am still at the opinion that
maybe some people within linuxtv or this ml should not only think of DVB-S/C/T PC adapters.
(Even Budget or FF)

There must be a Standard API so software is able to run without re-coding for every machine.
This is one of the reasons why i am using the API and talk to this ml.

There are STB's that even do not NEED any of your API commands  - but support them for compatiblity.
They also would work great and fast (sometimes faster ) without the linux dvb api.

But if there is hw supporting features these should be also implemented imho.

Last but not least :) 
I sended an email to this ML some month ago concerning DVR playback on a WinTv DVB-S card.
The driver is supporting this (even if it is broken mostly or just crashes)
Sometime's i think that there is more conversation about implementing functionallity and also 
bugfixing or completing it - instead of doing so.
People on this ml  are thinking ( it did no post till now) about API V4, in my opinion - better try to get a complete and
bugfree V3 :)

All of these sentences may NOT be interpreted as personal treating but as constructive critics.

Regards

Marcel