Re: [PATCH RFC] dvb: LNA implementation changes

2012-10-02 Thread Hans Verkuil
On Tue 2 October 2012 02:22:55 Antti Palosaari wrote: > Ping! > > u.data is defined __u32. Does it mean we could only use unsigned values > when DVB API v5 ? Looking at the dtv_property I'd say it only supports unsigned. So you need an enum like this: enum fe_lna { LNA_AUTO, LN

Re: [PATCH RFC] dvb: LNA implementation changes

2012-10-01 Thread Antti Palosaari
Ping! u.data is defined __u32. Does it mean we could only use unsigned values when DVB API v5 ? If yes, I will change LNA according to that and use 32bit maximum as LNA_AUTO. struct dtv_property { __u32 cmd; __u32 reserved[3]; union { __u32 data;

Re: [PATCH RFC] dvb: LNA implementation changes

2012-09-30 Thread Antti Palosaari
I added few comments for things what I was a little but unsure. Please comment. On 10/01/2012 03:35 AM, Antti Palosaari wrote: * use dvb property cache * implement get * LNA_AUTO value changed Hans and Mauro proposed use of cache implementation of get as they were planning to extend LNA usage

[PATCH RFC] dvb: LNA implementation changes

2012-09-30 Thread Antti Palosaari
* use dvb property cache * implement get * LNA_AUTO value changed Hans and Mauro proposed use of cache implementation of get as they were planning to extend LNA usage for analog side too. LNA_AUTO value was changed from (~0U) to INT_MIN as (~0U) resulted only -1 which is waste of numeric range if