Messages in this thread | | | From | David Brownell <> | Subject | Re: Flames over -- Re: Which is simpler? | Date | Sat, 18 Feb 2006 12:51:09 -0800 |
| |
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 3:43 pm, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > Are you quite certain about that? This is not > > the case for SCSI disks, but for USB, maybe it > > can provide sufficient information to the > > kernel about state changes without having to do > > a full rescan. If that is the case, and the > > hardware is erroneously reporting that all
Hardware is CORRECTLY reporting electrical disconnects, but Philip is wanting Linux to ignore those reports.
> > devices were disconnected and reconnected after > > an ACPI suspend to disk, then such hardware is > > broken and the kernel should be patched to work > > around it. > > No patch was attached...
No patch possible. Reading the other messages in that thread, Philip is advocating Linux ignore the USB spec. (Which is what _he_ appears to have been doing...)
What he has to do is more than submit a patch. He first needs to lobby the USB-IF to change the USB spec, and get every peripheral vendor to stop shipping USB devices and instead switch over to "Philip-USB". Then get all the billions of USB peripherals to go into the recycle bin and be replaced with products conforming to his new variant. It all seems highly unlikely. ;)
But yes, you're right ... if he's serious about changing all that stuff, he also needs stop being a member of the "never submitted a USB patch" club. Ideally, starting with small things.
- 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/
| |