[linux-dvb] Re: cinergyT2: which kernel/usb module to use?

[Johannes Stezenbach <js@linuxtv.org>]

Ralph Metzler wrote:
> Johannes Stezenbach writes:
>  > The whole issue could be trivially fixed by converting cinergyT2
>  > to use the dvb_frontend core, as *all* other frontends do.
>  > I would volunteer to do that, however I won't unless Holger
>  > gives me an OK -- I guess he had some reasons not to use
>  > dvb_frontend.
> 
> I don't know his reasons but for some frontends you just do 
> not need/want the whole dvb_frontend stuff, especially if it 
> is changing every few weeks.

It isn't changing every few weeks. It changed once during
restructuring. (Unless you count the intermediate restructure
attempts, but you didn't have to follow those.)

> I am also not using it for Twinhan cards myself.

Why? It won't be more code to use dvb_frontend.
So, what's the problem?

> Maybe dvb_frontend should just export some message queue handling
> calls. 

It is unnecessary. See above.

> Regardless of all this, an application should handle getting an
> EINVAL or ENOTSUPP from FE_GET_EVENT.

The API (as documented) requires frontends to implement FE_GET_EVENT.
Why should we want to break this?

Johannes