[Rejected] Signal Strength for more TV cards. (1 Viewer)

[framug]

Many TV cards owner should be more happy with this code.
Then, some of them will see signal strength values different than zero.
I cleaned the code and removed others own logs.
Finally, it's not many lines but, I hope you will be pleased with and, you will commit it in MP.

Note : Nova-T500 works fine because it is considered as 2 cards with one tuner each. (_tunerStatistics.Count = 1)
Therefore, for some dual cards (Pinnacle DUAL DVB-T PRO PCI for example but, I suppose all dual tuner cards like this one) driver report one card with 2 tuners.
In this case, _tunerStatistics.Count = 2 and stat.get_SignalLocked(out isLocked) always return false and, I didn't find why.
Then, it appears MP doesn't work with those cards type, for the moment.

Some own (very bad) logs wich could confirm that :

........
2009-04-29 08:14:25.828125 [4]: dvb: RunGraph
2009-04-29 08:14:30.250000 [4]: dvb: GetTunerSignalStatistics()
2009-04-29 08:14:30.250000 [4]: fmu RunGraph subChannel2 :0
2009-04-29 08:14:30.250000 [4]: fmu RunGraph _mapSubChannels.ContainsKey2
2009-04-29 08:14:30.250000 [4]: fmu _tunerStatistics.Count :2
2009-04-29 08:14:30.265625 [4]: fmu isLocked :False
2009-04-29 08:14:30.265625 [4]: fmu isLocked :False
2009-04-29 08:14:30.265625 [4]: fmu isLocked2 :False
2009-04-29 08:14:30.265625 [4]: dvb: LockedInOnSignal waiting 20ms
2009-04-29 08:14:30.281250 [4]: fmu _tunerStatistics.Count :2
2009-04-29 08:14:30.281250 [4]: fmu isLocked :False
2009-04-29 08:14:30.281250 [4]: fmu isLocked :False
2009-04-29 08:14:30.281250 [4]: fmu isLocked2 :False
......
......
2009-04-29 08:14:32.203125 [4]: dvb: LockedInOnSignal waiting 20ms
2009-04-29 08:14:32.218750 [4]: fmu _tunerStatistics.Count :2
2009-04-29 08:14:32.218750 [4]: fmu isLocked :False
2009-04-29 08:14:32.218750 [4]: fmu isLocked :False
2009-04-29 08:14:32.218750 [4]: fmu isLocked2 :False
2009-04-29 08:14:32.234375 [4]: dvb: LockedInOnSignal waiting 20ms
2009-04-29 08:14:32.250000 [4]: fmu _tunerStatistics.Count :2
2009-04-29 08:14:32.250000 [4]: fmu isLocked :False
2009-04-29 08:14:32.250000 [4]: fmu isLocked :False
2009-04-29 08:14:32.250000 [4]: fmu isLocked2 :False
2009-04-29 08:14:32.250000 [4]: dvb: LockedInOnSignal waiting 20ms
2009-04-29 08:14:32.281250 [4]: fmu isLocked3 :False
2009-04-29 08:14:32.281250 [4]: dvb: LockedInOnSignal could not lock onto channel - no signal or bad signal
2009-04-29 08:14:32.281250 [4]: fmu RunGraph !LockedInOnSignal()2
2009-04-29 08:14:32.281250 [4]: card2:setuptv 1 -1
2009-04-29 08:14:32.281250 [4]: Controller: setuptv 1 -1
2009-04-29 08:14:32.281250 [4]: Controller: Timeshifting failed, lets try next available card.

I wish you a nice week-end.
Franck.

 

[framug]

Hi,

Since half and two weeks without SVN integration and, 24th july is on approach (freeze), I suppose you found problem with this patch ?
IMHO, this fix is important because with that, more users will have signal on their TV cards.
I would like it will not be only reserved for Ray (PD), I and all NOVA-T500 users who can compile MP themself to benefit with, if possible.
Since I'm not a magician, may I know what happens, please ?
Also, I don't like my work goes in the trashcan, at least without knowing why.
Then, I'm sure this patch can't break MP.
I tested with analog and DVB-T cards.
Is there a problem with DVB-S, DVB-C and/or ATSC cards ?
Is it because of the specific NOVA-T500 working way ?
In my example (see remarks) -13 value became +87 because of the +100 - 13 operation.
If this cause the problem then, by transforming the -13 to +13 value only in UpdateSignalQuality(bool force) could it be enough ?
Then, I could apply the specific NOVA-T500 transform elsewhere in TVE3 code.
This specific exception could also be applied for others cards working the same way, in the future, depending on users feedback.
Please, let me know, if you want we go ahead for this problem.
I'm ready to try to improve it but, I can't do more alone without your feedback.

 

[elliottmc]

Hi,

I have asked the team for a response. I do know that there are not many people with the required expertise for this, and they are very busy, so please be patient.

Best wishes,

Mark

 

[morpheus_xx]

Hi,

I just want to tell you that we've seen your patch, checked it also. We also have a discussing thread which is 3 pages long, so we really looked into this.

Main "issue" is, that there's obviously no real standard to interpret the values. After your patch also some values got to "3" (probably -97 +100), doesn't also look too well

We will look further into this topic...

Morpheus

 

[framug]

Hi guys,
MANY THANKS for your answers, I can be patient, no problem.
Even if in this case, I would REALLY read what interesting things were written in this thread.
If you want we can talk more about... no problem for me.
I just want to stay informed about [Pending] posts because, it's uncomfortable.
I hope you can understand that.
Now, I know that you are aware of and, you will not forget it, it's pleasant.

Main "issue" is, that there's obviously no real standard to interpret the values. After your patch also some values got to "3" (probably -97 +100), doesn't also look too well

Then, I suppose, it's not with a card wich works like a Nova-T500, that's why, I just proposed to externalize the Nova-T500 operation elsewhere.
For example, it could simply be a ckeckbox in the TVE3 configuration Form.
Users with Nova-T500 and similar could check it, others not.
May be it will do the trick and, it will work for all users ?
Let me know what you think about.
Regards.

 

[elliottmc]

Hi,

I have discussed this with the team in IRC.

There is concern that this will cause problems with other cards, and there is simply no standard way for cards to report this data.

We are waiting for someone with the correct expertise to comment. Hopefully it will not be too long.

Best wishes,

Mark

 

[framug]

Hi elliottmc/Mark,
OK, thanks for this information.
It is urgent to wait, then.
Thank you.
framug/Franck

Edit : Sorry elliottmc, maybe I didn't understood correctly your last post (cause of my bad english, sometimes)
You wrote : "this will cause problems with other cards"
The checkedboxes in the configuration form I talked before was one checkedbox by card, of course.
Regards.

 

[framug]

Since your feedback, I modified "a little bit" for not having the "3" (probably -97 +100) signal.
Here are patches tested and, full working fine for my own use after database drop, both in analog and DVB-T situations.
Then, the "expert" will be able to test it more easily.
Bye.

 

[elliottmc]

Hi,

Thanks for this.

Would someone be able to produce binary files for user testing?

Thanks,

Mark

 

[chemelli]

What we would like to do is logging raw values and then collect as much logs as possible to get info from all possible vendors/drivers.

Once those data are collected we can try to find a math rule to normalize values in Db.

Simone