From: hverkuil at xs4all.nl (Hans Verkuil) Subject: [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v2 1/2] cec-follower: add tuner step increment/decrement Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 09:12:26 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <c56379c6-51e5-0199-1bfc-b1be359ca9a1@xs4all.nl> (raw) In-Reply-To: <fb849c63-6bac-5d40-f78d-f0ac57250a95@xs4all.nl> On 9/25/19 8:54 AM, Hans Verkuil wrote: > Hi Jiunn, > > On 9/24/19 9:24 PM, Jiunn Chang wrote: >> Tuner step increment/decrement will select the next highest or next >> lowest service frequency. There are a total of three possible >> frequencies from analog_freqs_khz given a broadcast type and system. >> >> Opcodes implemented: >> - <Tuner Step Increment> >> - <Tuner Step Decrement> >> >> Signed-off-by: Jiunn Chang <c0d1n61at3 at gmail.com> >> --- >> utils/cec-follower/cec-tuner.cpp | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/utils/cec-follower/cec-tuner.cpp b/utils/cec-follower/cec-tuner.cpp >> index acc3fd00..1a9b9d90 100644 >> --- a/utils/cec-follower/cec-tuner.cpp >> +++ b/utils/cec-follower/cec-tuner.cpp >> @@ -135,6 +135,22 @@ static bool analog_set_tuner_dev_info(struct node *node, struct cec_msg *msg) >> return false; >> } >> >> +static int analog_find_freq_index(struct cec_op_tuner_device_info *info) >> +{ >> + if (info->analog.ana_freq == 0) >> + return -1; >> + >> + int ana_freq_khz = (info->analog.ana_freq * 625) / 10; >> + >> + for (int i = 0; i < NUM_ANALOG_FREQS; i++) { >> + int freq = analog_freqs_khz[info->analog.ana_bcast_type][info->analog.bcast_system][i]; >> + >> + if (ana_freq_khz == freq) >> + return i; >> + } >> + return -1; >> +} > > Hmm, I don't like this code. I think that it would be cleaner to just add: > > static unsigned int analog_freq_idx[3][9]; > > Which contains the index of the current frequency for each bcast_type/system > combination. > > This ensures that 1) there always is a current frequency and 2) tuner stepping > is now trivial since all you need to do is to update the corresponding index. I've been reading up on this a bit more, and section CEC 13.8.2 states that the Tuner Step commands cycle through a set of services defined by the tuner device. But normally it will cycle through all services. That means that rather than cycling through the frequencies of just the current bcast_type/system, the follower should cycle through ALL channels, both analog and digital. So for analog we really have 3 * 9 * 3 channels, and this will be more once the digital channels are added. In any case, this means that there is just a single 'static unsigned int freq_idx;' and not an array. Regards, Hans > > Now, that said, I was thinking that it would be nice to have one bcast_type/system > combo with no channels at all, since that's a nice test as well. > > I think that setting secam-lq for satellite to { 0, 0, 0 } to indicate no > defined channels would make a nice test case. > > Something for a follow-up patch, though. > >> + >> void process_tuner_record_timer_msgs(struct node *node, struct cec_msg &msg, unsigned me) >> { >> bool is_bcast = cec_msg_is_broadcast(&msg); >> @@ -178,12 +194,37 @@ void process_tuner_record_timer_msgs(struct node *node, struct cec_msg &msg, uns >> return; >> >> case CEC_MSG_SELECT_DIGITAL_SERVICE: >> - case CEC_MSG_TUNER_STEP_DECREMENT: >> - case CEC_MSG_TUNER_STEP_INCREMENT: >> - if (!cec_has_tuner(1 << me)) >> + case CEC_MSG_TUNER_STEP_DECREMENT: { >> + if (!cec_has_tuner(1 << me) && !cec_has_tv(1 << me)) >> break; >> + >> + struct cec_op_tuner_device_info *info = &node->state.tuner_dev_info; >> + int freq_idx = analog_find_freq_index(info); >> + int idx = (freq_idx == 0) ? NUM_ANALOG_FREQS : freq_idx; >> + >> + if (info->is_analog) { >> + int freq = analog_freqs_khz[info->analog.ana_bcast_type][info->analog.bcast_system][--idx]; >> + >> + info->analog.ana_freq = (freq * 10) / 625; >> + } >> return; >> + } >> + >> + case CEC_MSG_TUNER_STEP_INCREMENT: { >> + if (!cec_has_tuner(1 << me) && !cec_has_tv(1 << me)) >> + break; >> >> + struct cec_op_tuner_device_info *info = &node->state.tuner_dev_info; >> + int freq_idx = analog_find_freq_index(info); >> + int idx = (freq_idx == NUM_ANALOG_FREQS - 1) ? -1 : freq_idx; >> + >> + if (info->is_analog) { >> + int freq = analog_freqs_khz[info->analog.ana_bcast_type][info->analog.bcast_system][++idx]; >> + >> + info->analog.ana_freq = (freq * 10) / 625; >> + } >> + return; >> + } >> >> /* >> One Touch Record >> > > Regards, > > Hans >
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: hverkuil@xs4all.nl (Hans Verkuil) Subject: [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v2 1/2] cec-follower: add tuner step increment/decrement Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 09:12:26 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <c56379c6-51e5-0199-1bfc-b1be359ca9a1@xs4all.nl> (raw) Message-ID: <20190925071226.8ygYgaln9mSXno4N7FMel0pqLWAqDubsLKI2SBJGaic@z> (raw) In-Reply-To: <fb849c63-6bac-5d40-f78d-f0ac57250a95@xs4all.nl> On 9/25/19 8:54 AM, Hans Verkuil wrote: > Hi Jiunn, > > On 9/24/19 9:24 PM, Jiunn Chang wrote: >> Tuner step increment/decrement will select the next highest or next >> lowest service frequency. There are a total of three possible >> frequencies from analog_freqs_khz given a broadcast type and system. >> >> Opcodes implemented: >> - <Tuner Step Increment> >> - <Tuner Step Decrement> >> >> Signed-off-by: Jiunn Chang <c0d1n61at3 at gmail.com> >> --- >> utils/cec-follower/cec-tuner.cpp | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/utils/cec-follower/cec-tuner.cpp b/utils/cec-follower/cec-tuner.cpp >> index acc3fd00..1a9b9d90 100644 >> --- a/utils/cec-follower/cec-tuner.cpp >> +++ b/utils/cec-follower/cec-tuner.cpp >> @@ -135,6 +135,22 @@ static bool analog_set_tuner_dev_info(struct node *node, struct cec_msg *msg) >> return false; >> } >> >> +static int analog_find_freq_index(struct cec_op_tuner_device_info *info) >> +{ >> + if (info->analog.ana_freq == 0) >> + return -1; >> + >> + int ana_freq_khz = (info->analog.ana_freq * 625) / 10; >> + >> + for (int i = 0; i < NUM_ANALOG_FREQS; i++) { >> + int freq = analog_freqs_khz[info->analog.ana_bcast_type][info->analog.bcast_system][i]; >> + >> + if (ana_freq_khz == freq) >> + return i; >> + } >> + return -1; >> +} > > Hmm, I don't like this code. I think that it would be cleaner to just add: > > static unsigned int analog_freq_idx[3][9]; > > Which contains the index of the current frequency for each bcast_type/system > combination. > > This ensures that 1) there always is a current frequency and 2) tuner stepping > is now trivial since all you need to do is to update the corresponding index. I've been reading up on this a bit more, and section CEC 13.8.2 states that the Tuner Step commands cycle through a set of services defined by the tuner device. But normally it will cycle through all services. That means that rather than cycling through the frequencies of just the current bcast_type/system, the follower should cycle through ALL channels, both analog and digital. So for analog we really have 3 * 9 * 3 channels, and this will be more once the digital channels are added. In any case, this means that there is just a single 'static unsigned int freq_idx;' and not an array. Regards, Hans > > Now, that said, I was thinking that it would be nice to have one bcast_type/system > combo with no channels at all, since that's a nice test as well. > > I think that setting secam-lq for satellite to { 0, 0, 0 } to indicate no > defined channels would make a nice test case. > > Something for a follow-up patch, though. > >> + >> void process_tuner_record_timer_msgs(struct node *node, struct cec_msg &msg, unsigned me) >> { >> bool is_bcast = cec_msg_is_broadcast(&msg); >> @@ -178,12 +194,37 @@ void process_tuner_record_timer_msgs(struct node *node, struct cec_msg &msg, uns >> return; >> >> case CEC_MSG_SELECT_DIGITAL_SERVICE: >> - case CEC_MSG_TUNER_STEP_DECREMENT: >> - case CEC_MSG_TUNER_STEP_INCREMENT: >> - if (!cec_has_tuner(1 << me)) >> + case CEC_MSG_TUNER_STEP_DECREMENT: { >> + if (!cec_has_tuner(1 << me) && !cec_has_tv(1 << me)) >> break; >> + >> + struct cec_op_tuner_device_info *info = &node->state.tuner_dev_info; >> + int freq_idx = analog_find_freq_index(info); >> + int idx = (freq_idx == 0) ? NUM_ANALOG_FREQS : freq_idx; >> + >> + if (info->is_analog) { >> + int freq = analog_freqs_khz[info->analog.ana_bcast_type][info->analog.bcast_system][--idx]; >> + >> + info->analog.ana_freq = (freq * 10) / 625; >> + } >> return; >> + } >> + >> + case CEC_MSG_TUNER_STEP_INCREMENT: { >> + if (!cec_has_tuner(1 << me) && !cec_has_tv(1 << me)) >> + break; >> >> + struct cec_op_tuner_device_info *info = &node->state.tuner_dev_info; >> + int freq_idx = analog_find_freq_index(info); >> + int idx = (freq_idx == NUM_ANALOG_FREQS - 1) ? -1 : freq_idx; >> + >> + if (info->is_analog) { >> + int freq = analog_freqs_khz[info->analog.ana_bcast_type][info->analog.bcast_system][++idx]; >> + >> + info->analog.ana_freq = (freq * 10) / 625; >> + } >> + return; >> + } >> >> /* >> One Touch Record >> > > Regards, > > Hans >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-25 7:12 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2019-09-24 14:17 [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH 0/2] cec-compliance: tuner control c0d1n61at3 2019-09-24 14:17 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-09-24 14:17 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH 1/2] cec-follower: add tuner step increment/decrement c0d1n61at3 2019-09-24 14:17 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-09-24 15:20 ` hverkuil 2019-09-24 15:20 ` Hans Verkuil 2019-09-24 14:17 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH 2/2] cec-compliance: add/refactor tuner control tests c0d1n61at3 2019-09-24 14:17 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-09-24 19:24 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v2 0/2] cec-compliance: tuner control c0d1n61at3 2019-09-24 19:24 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-09-30 4:30 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v3 0/3] " c0d1n61at3 2019-09-30 4:30 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-10-01 3:18 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v4 " c0d1n61at3 2019-10-01 3:18 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-10-03 3:18 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v5 0/2] " c0d1n61at3 2019-10-03 3:18 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-10-04 4:05 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v6 0/1] " c0d1n61at3 2019-10-04 4:05 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-10-04 4:05 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v6 1/1] Add test for new features in cec-follower c0d1n61at3 2019-10-04 4:05 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-10-03 3:18 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v5 1/2] cec-follower: add tuner step increment/decrement c0d1n61at3 2019-10-03 3:18 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-10-03 3:18 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v5 2/2] Add test for new features in cec-follower c0d1n61at3 2019-10-03 3:18 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-10-03 6:51 ` hverkuil 2019-10-03 6:51 ` Hans Verkuil 2019-10-01 3:18 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v4 1/3] cec-follower: fix bugs for tuner emulation c0d1n61at3 2019-10-01 3:18 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-10-01 3:18 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v4 2/3] cec-follower: add tuner step increment/decrement c0d1n61at3 2019-10-01 3:18 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-10-01 7:12 ` hverkuil 2019-10-01 7:12 ` Hans Verkuil 2019-10-01 3:18 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v4 3/3] cec-compliance: add tuner control test c0d1n61at3 2019-10-01 3:18 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-10-01 7:51 ` hverkuil 2019-10-01 7:51 ` Hans Verkuil 2019-09-30 4:30 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v3 1/3] cec-follower: fix bugs for tuner emulation c0d1n61at3 2019-09-30 4:30 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-09-30 9:12 ` hverkuil 2019-09-30 9:12 ` Hans Verkuil 2019-09-30 4:30 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v3 2/3] cec-follower: add tuner step increment/decrement c0d1n61at3 2019-09-30 4:30 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-09-30 9:35 ` hverkuil 2019-09-30 9:35 ` Hans Verkuil 2019-09-30 4:30 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v3 3/3] cec-compliance: refactor tuner control tests c0d1n61at3 2019-09-30 4:30 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-09-30 9:43 ` hverkuil 2019-09-30 9:43 ` Hans Verkuil 2019-09-24 19:24 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v2 1/2] cec-follower: add tuner step increment/decrement c0d1n61at3 2019-09-24 19:24 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-09-24 19:31 ` skhan 2019-09-24 19:31 ` Shuah Khan 2019-09-25 6:54 ` hverkuil 2019-09-25 6:54 ` Hans Verkuil 2019-09-25 7:12 ` hverkuil [this message] 2019-09-25 7:12 ` Hans Verkuil 2019-09-24 19:24 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v2 2/2] cec-compliance: add/refactor tuner control tests c0d1n61at3 2019-09-24 19:24 ` Jiunn Chang 2019-09-24 19:44 ` skhan 2019-09-24 19:44 ` Shuah Khan 2019-09-25 7:22 ` hverkuil 2019-09-25 7:22 ` Hans Verkuil
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=c56379c6-51e5-0199-1bfc-b1be359ca9a1@xs4all.nl \ --to=linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linux-foundation.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).