summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorDavid Härdeman <david@hardeman.nu>2014-04-03 20:31:51 -0300
committerMauro Carvalho Chehab <m.chehab@samsung.com>2014-07-23 21:26:08 -0300
commitaf3a4a9bbeb00df3e42e77240b4cdac5479812f9 (patch)
treec58da3eef556c0122365bd3d0b37243fcf988842
parent4dd9bb91bb5dc44e3f8c23c60a0ba432e50d7488 (diff)
[media] dib0700: NEC scancode cleanup
the RC RX packet is defined as: struct dib0700_rc_response { ... u8 not_system; u8 system; ... u8 data; u8 not_data; The NEC protocol transmits in the order: system not_system data not_data Note that the code defines the NEC extended scancode as: scancode = be16_to_cpu(poll_reply->system16) << 8 | poll_reply->data; i.e. scancode = poll_reply->not_system << 16 | poll_reply->system << 8 | poll_reply->data; Which, if the order *is* reversed, would mean that the scancode that gets defined is in reality: scancode = poll_reply->system << 16 | poll_reply->not_system << 8 | poll_reply->data; Which is the same as the order used in drivers/media/rc/ir-nec-decoder.c. This patch changes the code to match my assumption (the generated scancode should, however, not change). [m.chehab@samsung.com: rebased and fixed the decoding error message] Signed-off-by: David Härdeman <david@hardeman.nu> CC: Patrick Boettcher <pboettcher@kernellabs.com> Tested-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <m.chehab@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <m.chehab@samsung.com>
-rw-r--r--drivers/media/usb/dvb-usb/dib0700_core.c36
1 files changed, 20 insertions, 16 deletions
diff --git a/drivers/media/usb/dvb-usb/dib0700_core.c b/drivers/media/usb/dvb-usb/dib0700_core.c
index c14285fa8271..38b151f7ceac 100644
--- a/drivers/media/usb/dvb-usb/dib0700_core.c
+++ b/drivers/media/usb/dvb-usb/dib0700_core.c
@@ -658,13 +658,8 @@ out:
struct dib0700_rc_response {
u8 report_id;
u8 data_state;
- union {
- u16 system16;
- struct {
- u8 not_system;
- u8 system;
- };
- };
+ u8 system;
+ u8 not_system;
u8 data;
u8 not_data;
};
@@ -710,20 +705,29 @@ static void dib0700_rc_urb_completion(struct urb *purb)
toggle = 0;
/* NEC protocol sends repeat code as 0 0 0 FF */
- if ((poll_reply->system == 0x00) && (poll_reply->data == 0x00)
- && (poll_reply->not_data == 0xff)) {
+ if (poll_reply->system == 0x00 &&
+ poll_reply->not_system == 0x00 &&
+ poll_reply->data == 0x00 &&
+ poll_reply->not_data == 0xff) {
poll_reply->data_state = 2;
break;
}
- if ((poll_reply->system ^ poll_reply->not_system) != 0xff) {
+ if ((poll_reply->data ^ poll_reply->not_data) != 0xff) {
+ deb_data("NEC32 protocol\n");
+ keycode = RC_SCANCODE_NEC32(poll_reply->system << 24 |
+ poll_reply->not_system << 16 |
+ poll_reply->data << 8 |
+ poll_reply->not_data);
+ } else if ((poll_reply->system ^ poll_reply->not_system) != 0xff) {
deb_data("NEC extended protocol\n");
- /* NEC extended code - 24 bits */
- keycode = be16_to_cpu(poll_reply->system16) << 8 | poll_reply->data;
+ keycode = RC_SCANCODE_NECX(poll_reply->system << 8 |
+ poll_reply->not_system,
+ poll_reply->data);
} else {
deb_data("NEC normal protocol\n");
- /* normal NEC code - 16 bits */
- keycode = poll_reply->system << 8 | poll_reply->data;
+ keycode = RC_SCANCODE_NEC(poll_reply->system,
+ poll_reply->data);
}
break;
@@ -738,8 +742,8 @@ static void dib0700_rc_urb_completion(struct urb *purb)
if ((poll_reply->data + poll_reply->not_data) != 0xff) {
/* Key failed integrity check */
- err("key failed integrity check: %04x %02x %02x",
- poll_reply->system,
+ err("key failed integrity check: %02x %02x %02x %02x",
+ poll_reply->system, poll_reply->not_system,
poll_reply->data, poll_reply->not_data);
goto resubmit;
}