Re: [PATCH 00/14] ddbridge: bump to ddbridge-0.9.29

[Ralph Metzler <rjkm@metzlerbros.de>]

Daniel Scheller writes:
 > Am Mon, 10 Jul 2017 10:11:01 +0200
 > schrieb Ralph Metzler <rjkm@metzlerbros.de>:
 > 
 > > Daniel Scheller writes:
 > >  > Stripped functionality compared to dddvb:
 > >  > 
 > >  >  - DVB-C modulator card support removed (requires DVB core API)  
 > > 
 > > not really besides one device name entry.
 > 
 > ... and a header :-) Maybe we should start another thread on this for a
 > probable follow-up project.
 > 
 > >  >  - OctoNET SAT>IP server/box support removed (requires API aswell)
 > >  >  - with this, GT link support was removed (only on OctoNET
 > >  > hardware)  
 > > 
 > > There is other PCIe based hardware which uses/will use this.
 > 
 > Umm, good to know - thus better shouldn't (even accidentally)
 > throw away the remove-revert of the GTL support for future cards.
 > 
 > >  >  drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge-core.c | 4242
 > >  > ++++++++++++++++++----------
 > >  > drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge-hw.c   |  299 ++
 > >  > drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge-hw.h   |   52 +
 > >  > drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge-i2c.c  |  310 ++
 > >  > drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge-io.h   |   71 +
 > >  > drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge-irq.c  |  161 ++
 > >  > drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge-main.c |  393 +++
 > >  > drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge-regs.h |  138 +-
 > >  > drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge.h      |  355 ++-  
 > > 
 > > I thought we settled on core, i2c, main, (and mod, ns, which you do
 > > not include). This will diverge then from my code.
 > 
 > IIRC this was -main.c, and basically the code split, but no specific
 > file. However, each of the additionals (hw, io, irq) were done with a
 > reason (please also see their commit messages at patches 4-6):
 > 
 > -io.h is there since the comparably complex functions in the original
 > ddbridge.h sort of scared me off and IMHO shouldn't live together with
 > struct definitions and such, so I moved them to a separate object
 > first. With the GTL things removed, the remainder was rather small, and
 > Jasmin pointed me in the "make it static inline in a header instead"
 > direction. When eventually GTL gets added back, it should go into it's
 > own object/module.
 > 
 > -hw.c/h moves all things hardware-definition/info related like regmaps
 > into one single place, currently it's spread out into -main and -core,
 > which might make things difficult to find.
 > 
 > -irq.c gets rid of the need of additional ifdefs related to
 > CONFIG_PCI_MSI, in that "defined but unused function" warnings are
 > generated if this isn't defined. Again, also makes it easier to find,
 > rather than search through ~3800 lines of -core :)
 > 
 > If you're comfortable with this, I will propose it via a GitHub PR as
 > well (alongside the other things I'd like to push out to you). For the
 > in-kernel code, I'd prefer to keep it like this.


As I wrote before, changes like this will break other things like the OctopusNet
build tree. So, I cannot use them like this or without changes at other places.
And even if I wanted to, I cannot pull anything into the public dddvb repository.