Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Nov 2005 03:09:38 +0100 | From | Adrian Bunk <> | Subject | Re: [-mm patch] USB_LIBUSUAL shouldn't be user-visible |
| |
On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 03:46:44PM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 11:56:48AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 10:41:17PM -0800, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > > > On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 14:28:08 -0800, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > What about letting the two drivers always use libusual? > > > > > > > > Pete? What do you think about this patch? > > > > > > It does nothing to explain how exactly the current configuration managed > > > not to work, which leaves me unsatisfied. I did test the kernel to build > > > correctly with libusub on and off. All we have is this: > > > > The problem is not that it wouldn't work. > > The question is whether users compiling their kernel should know > > anything about USB_LIBUSUAL. > > IMHO, USB_LIBUSUAL is an internal implementation detail and there's no > > reason why a user should ever see this option. > > This is what my patch does. > > No, it's not an implementation detail, it explicitly changes the way > things work, and lets users change they way they work, by giving them > run-time options. > > So it should not be hidden, at least not yet until everyone gets used to > using it.
Adding a feature doesn't require a new config option for informing the user.
What about my second suggestion to always use libusual in the two drivers instead of having two code paths in each of them?
> thanks, > > greg k-h
cu Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |