Re: [RFC] What are the goals for the architecture of an in-kernel IR system?

2009-11-29 Thread Ray Lee
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Andy Walls wrote: >> If decoding can *only* be sanely handled in user-space, that's one >> thing. If it can be handled in kernel, then that would be better. > > Why does the address space in which decoding is performed make the > decoding process better or worse?  

Re: [RFC] What are the goals for the architecture of an in-kernel IR system?

2009-11-29 Thread Ray Lee
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Alan Cox wrote: >> If decoding can *only* be sanely handled in user-space, that's one >> thing. If it can be handled in kernel, then that would be better. > > Why ? > > I can compute fast fourier transforms in the kernel but that doesn't make > it better than doin

Re: [RFC] What are the goals for the architecture of an in-kernel IR system?

2009-11-29 Thread Ray Lee
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 9:28 AM, Maxim Levitsky wrote: > This has zero advantages besides good developer feeling that "My system > has one less daemon..." Surely it's clear that having an unnecessary daemon is introducing another point of failure? Reducing complexity is not just its own reward in