Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 20 Sep 2006 12:02:45 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] mxser: make an experimental clone |
| |
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 16:06:55 +0200 (CEST) Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote: > > Ho hum, this is hard. I guess breaking the driver is one way to find out > > who is using it, but those who redistribute the kernel for a living might > > not appreciate the technique. > > > > Perhaps we could create an mxser-new.c and offer that in config, plan to > > remove mxser.c N months hence? > > Ok, here's a patch doing this. When you apply it, drop > mxser-upgrade-to-191.patch, please, to get back unmodified version. >
It was, umm, naive to assume that was the only outstanding patch against mxser.c. I had four patches. One wasn't actually in use and one I just dropped, so we now have serial-fix-up-offenders-peering-at-baud-bits-directly.patch and const-struct-tty_operations.patch.
> > mxser: clone a new driver > > Clone a new driver for moxa smartio devices. It contains update to version > 1.9.1 from Moxa site and static to dynamic structures (including some > renaming) conversion for further work -- converting to pci probing.
That wasn't a good way to do this. It would have been (much) better to have one patch which copies mxser.c to mxser_new.c and *nothing else*. Then, new patches which update mxser_new.c.
So I have converted your patch into one which simply copies mxser.[ch] to mxser_new.[ch] and which makes no other changes. The versions which were copied were those _after_ the two pending patches were applied. Please send updates against those new files, thanks.
- 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/
| |