stb0899: Removed an extra byte sent at init on DiSEqC bus

PATCH In review Florent AUDEBERT 4 participants 6 messages Jun 11, 2010 – Jun 1, 2011 Media (V4L/DVB)

lore

Share & tools

lore

Florent AUDEBERT

author

2010-06-11 16:07 UTC #0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 stb0899: Removed an extra byte sent at init on DiSEqC bus

Hi,

I noticed a stray 0x00 at init on DiSEqC bus (KNC1 DVB-S2) with a DiSEqC tool analyzer.

I removed the register from initialization table and all seem to go well (at least for my KNC board).

Regards,

Signed-off-by Florent Audebert <[email protected]>

---
 drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/az6027.c       |    1 -
 drivers/media/dvb/mantis/mantis_vp1041.c |    1 -
 drivers/media/dvb/ttpci/budget-av.c      |    1 -
 drivers/media/dvb/ttpci/budget-ci.c      |    1 -
 4 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/az6027.c +0 -1

index 6681ac1..9710e7b 100644
@@ -40,7 +40,6 @@ static const struct stb0899_s1_reg az6027_stb0899_s1_init_1[] = {
 	{ STB0899_DISRX_ST0     	, 0x04 },
 	{ STB0899_DISRX_ST1     	, 0x00 },
 	{ STB0899_DISPARITY     	, 0x00 },
-	{ STB0899_DISFIFO       	, 0x00 },
 	{ STB0899_DISSTATUS		, 0x20 },
 	{ STB0899_DISF22        	, 0x99 },
 	{ STB0899_DISF22RX      	, 0xa8 },

drivers/media/dvb/mantis/mantis_vp1041.c +0 -1

index d1aa2bc..7bb1f28 100644
@@ -51,7 +51,6 @@ static const struct stb0899_s1_reg vp1041_stb0899_s1_init_1[] = {
 	{ STB0899_DISRX_ST0     	, 0x04 },
 	{ STB0899_DISRX_ST1     	, 0x00 },
 	{ STB0899_DISPARITY     	, 0x00 },
-	{ STB0899_DISFIFO       	, 0x00 },
 	{ STB0899_DISSTATUS		, 0x20 },
 	{ STB0899_DISF22        	, 0x99 },
 	{ STB0899_DISF22RX      	, 0xa8 },

drivers/media/dvb/ttpci/budget-av.c +0 -1

index 983672a..b697af4 100644
@@ -896,7 +896,6 @@ static const struct stb0899_s1_reg knc1_stb0899_s1_init_1[] = {
 	{ STB0899_DISRX_ST0		, 0x04 },
 	{ STB0899_DISRX_ST1		, 0x00 },
 	{ STB0899_DISPARITY		, 0x00 },
-	{ STB0899_DISFIFO		, 0x00 },
 	{ STB0899_DISSTATUS		, 0x20 },
 	{ STB0899_DISF22		, 0x8c },
 	{ STB0899_DISF22RX		, 0x9a },

drivers/media/dvb/ttpci/budget-ci.c +0 -1

index 13ac9e3..da5a72c 100644
@@ -1046,7 +1046,6 @@ static const struct stb0899_s1_reg tt3200_stb0899_s1_init_1[] = {
 	{ STB0899_DISRX_ST0     	, 0x04 },
 	{ STB0899_DISRX_ST1     	, 0x00 },
 	{ STB0899_DISPARITY     	, 0x00 },
-	{ STB0899_DISFIFO       	, 0x00 },
 	{ STB0899_DISSTATUS		, 0x20 },
 	{ STB0899_DISF22        	, 0x8c },
 	{ STB0899_DISF22RX      	, 0x9a },

Signature · 1 line

1.7.1

Florent AUDEBERT

author

2010-10-19 13:02 UTC #1 lore raw

Quoted 5 lines · Florent AUDEBERT

I noticed a stray 0x00 at init on DiSEqC bus (KNC1 DVB-S2) with a DiSEqC tool analyzer.
I removed the register from initialization table and all seem to go well (at least for my KNC board).

Hi,

This old small patch had been marked superseded on patchwork[1].

Is there an non-obvious case when patches go superseded ? Perhaps I missed something but it seems to me no other patch replaced it.

Regards,

[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/105621/

Signature · 1 line

Florent AUDEBERT

Mauro Carvalho Chehab

2010-10-19 16:05 UTC #2 lore raw

Em 19-10-2010 10:55, Florent AUDEBERT escreveu:

Quoted 7 lines · Florent AUDEBERT

Quoted 5 lines
I noticed a stray 0x00 at init on DiSEqC bus (KNC1 DVB-S2) with a DiSEqC tool analyzer.
I removed the register from initialization table and all seem to go well (at least for my KNC board).

Quoted 6 lines

Hi,
This old small patch had been marked superseded on patchwork[1].
Is there an non-obvious case when patches go superseded ? Perhaps I missed something but it seems to me no other patch replaced it.

This is one of the bad things with patchwork: there's no "reason" field associated to a status change, nor it marks when the status were changed.

A search on my linux-media box, showed that this patch were there, waiting for Manu review, at the email I sent on Jul, 6 2010. The patch still applies, and I didn't find any reply from Manu giving any feedback about it.

So, I'm re-tagging it as under review.

Manu, any comments about this patch (and the other remaining patches that we're waiting fro your review) ?

Quoted 7 lines

Regards,
[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/105621/

Cheers,
Mauro

Mauro Carvalho Chehab

2011-06-01 13:57 UTC #3 lore raw

Em 19-10-2010 14:05, Mauro Carvalho Chehab escreveu:

Quoted 18 lines

Em 19-10-2010 10:55, Florent AUDEBERT escreveu:
Quoted 7 lines · Florent AUDEBERT
Quoted 5 lines
I noticed a stray 0x00 at init on DiSEqC bus (KNC1 DVB-S2) with a DiSEqC tool analyzer.
I removed the register from initialization table and all seem to go well (at least for my KNC board).
Quoted 6 lines
Hi,
This old small patch had been marked superseded on patchwork[1].
Is there an non-obvious case when patches go superseded ? Perhaps I missed something but it seems to me no other patch replaced it.
This is one of the bad things with patchwork: there's no "reason" field associated to a status change, nor it marks when the status were changed.

Quoted 8 lines

A search on my linux-media box, showed that this patch were there, waiting for Manu review, at the email I sent on Jul, 6 2010. The patch still applies, and I didn't find any reply from Manu giving any feedback about it.
So, I'm re-tagging it as under review.
Manu, any comments about this patch (and the other remaining patches that we're waiting fro your review) ?

Manu,

Please ack or nack this patch. It was sent about 1,5 years ago! if you don't comment, I'll assume that this patch is ok and I'll apply it.

Thanks,
Mauro.

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: stb0899: Removed an extra byte sent at init on DiSEqC bus
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 16:01:25 -0000
From: Florent AUDEBERT <[email protected]>
X-Patchwork-Id: 105621
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], Florent Audebert <[email protected]>

drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/az6027.c +0 -1

index 6681ac1..9710e7b 100644
@@ -40,7 +40,6 @@ static const struct stb0899_s1_reg az6027_stb0899_s1_init_1[] = {
 	{ STB0899_DISRX_ST0     	, 0x04 },
 	{ STB0899_DISRX_ST1     	, 0x00 },
 	{ STB0899_DISPARITY     	, 0x00 },
-	{ STB0899_DISFIFO       	, 0x00 },
 	{ STB0899_DISSTATUS		, 0x20 },
 	{ STB0899_DISF22        	, 0x99 },
 	{ STB0899_DISF22RX      	, 0xa8 },

drivers/media/dvb/mantis/mantis_vp1041.c +0 -1

index d1aa2bc..7bb1f28 100644
@@ -51,7 +51,6 @@ static const struct stb0899_s1_reg vp1041_stb0899_s1_init_1[] = {
 	{ STB0899_DISRX_ST0     	, 0x04 },
 	{ STB0899_DISRX_ST1     	, 0x00 },
 	{ STB0899_DISPARITY     	, 0x00 },
-	{ STB0899_DISFIFO       	, 0x00 },
 	{ STB0899_DISSTATUS		, 0x20 },
 	{ STB0899_DISF22        	, 0x99 },
 	{ STB0899_DISF22RX      	, 0xa8 },

drivers/media/dvb/ttpci/budget-av.c +0 -1

index 983672a..b697af4 100644
@@ -896,7 +896,6 @@ static const struct stb0899_s1_reg knc1_stb0899_s1_init_1[] = {
 	{ STB0899_DISRX_ST0		, 0x04 },
 	{ STB0899_DISRX_ST1		, 0x00 },
 	{ STB0899_DISPARITY		, 0x00 },
-	{ STB0899_DISFIFO		, 0x00 },
 	{ STB0899_DISSTATUS		, 0x20 },
 	{ STB0899_DISF22		, 0x8c },
 	{ STB0899_DISF22RX		, 0x9a },

drivers/media/dvb/ttpci/budget-ci.c +0 -1

index 13ac9e3..da5a72c 100644
@@ -1046,7 +1046,6 @@ static const struct stb0899_s1_reg tt3200_stb0899_s1_init_1[] = {
 	{ STB0899_DISRX_ST0     	, 0x04 },
 	{ STB0899_DISRX_ST1     	, 0x00 },
 	{ STB0899_DISPARITY     	, 0x00 },
-	{ STB0899_DISFIFO       	, 0x00 },
 	{ STB0899_DISSTATUS		, 0x20 },
 	{ STB0899_DISF22        	, 0x8c },
 	{ STB0899_DISF22RX      	, 0x9a },

Manu Abraham

2011-06-01 16:24 UTC #4 lore raw

Quoted 33 lines · Mauro Carvalho Chehab

Em 19-10-2010 14:05, Mauro Carvalho Chehab escreveu:
Quoted 26 lines
Em 19-10-2010 10:55, Florent AUDEBERT escreveu:
Quoted 7 lines · Florent AUDEBERT
Quoted 5 lines
I noticed a stray 0x00 at init on DiSEqC bus (KNC1 DVB-S2) with a DiSEqC tool analyzer.
I removed the register from initialization table and all seem to go well (at least for my KNC board).
Quoted 7 lines
Hi,
This old small patch had been marked superseded on patchwork[1].
Is there an non-obvious case when patches go superseded ? Perhaps I missed
something but it seems to me no other patch replaced it.
This is one of the bad things with patchwork: there's no "reason" field associated
to a status change, nor it marks when the status were changed.
A search on my linux-media box, showed that this patch were there, waiting for
Manu review, at the email I sent on Jul, 6 2010. The patch still applies, and
I didn't find any reply from Manu giving any feedback about it.
Quoted 5 lines
So, I'm re-tagging it as under review.
Manu, any comments about this patch (and the other remaining patches that we're
waiting fro your review) ?

Quoted 7 lines

Manu,
Please ack or nack this patch. It was sent about 1,5 years ago! if you don't comment, I'll assume that this patch is ok and I'll apply it.
Thanks,
Mauro.

Mauro,

I have been away from home and not yet back due to a nasty back sprain, but expect to return mid next week. Please hold off on the patches that you need inputs from my side. I will get back on these, the following weekend.

Sorry about any inconvenience caused.

Thanks,
Manu

Mauro Carvalho Chehab

2011-06-01 18:56 UTC #5 lore raw

Em 01-06-2011 13:24, Manu Abraham escreveu:

Quoted 6 lines · Mauro Carvalho Chehab

Mauro,
I have been away from home and not yet back due to a nasty back sprain, but expect to return mid next week.

Sorry to hear about it. I hope you to recover soon from the sprain.

Quoted 4 lines

Please hold off on the
patches that you need inputs from my side. I will get back on these, the following weekend.
Sorry about any inconvenience caused.

Ok.

Thanks!
Mauro

Quoted 7 lines

Thanks,
Manu
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html