lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Apr]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectDST/BT878 module customization (.. was: Critical points about ...)
    Hi,

    Trent Piepho wrote another patch for it, it just completes Uwe's patch
    in the end.

    http://linuxtv.org/hg/~tap/dst-new?cmd=changeset;node=bbdd2b53cd5c;style=gitweb

    as far as I see from that patch it cleans up a memory leak which would
    happen when the system tries to load the dst module if it's not
    available and it also prints a message that points the user should
    enable it in the kernel if needed.

    It also bundles the dst and dst_ca objects to one selectable option.
    So the idea remains the same.
    From my side I do not see any problem with that patch, if someone else
    has a problem with it please state out the reason.

    Markus


    On 4/30/07, Markus Rechberger <mrechberger@gmail.com> wrote:
    > On 4/30/07, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote:
    > >
    > > On Apr 30 2007 19:25, Uwe Bugla wrote:
    > >
    > > >THIS PATCH IS DONE TO AVOID RAM WASTE FOR CASES IN WHICH IT IS PROVEN
    > THAT
    > > DST
    > > >AND DST_CA ARE NOT NEEDED AT ALL!!!!
    > > >[...]
    > >
    > >
    > > How much on the Theo-meter are we yet?
    > >
    >
    > it's enough, I told him that I'll look at it and try to get some other
    > people involved if it really breaks something it should get stated
    > out; and I'll refuse any further help if he starts to write any more
    > abusive mail.
    >
    > So to his proposal:
    >
    > the whole noise is about following Makefile patch:
    > -obj-$(CONFIG_DVB_BT8XX) += bt878.o dvb-bt8xx.o dst.o dst_ca.o
    > +obj-$(CONFIG_DVB_BT8XX) += bt878.o dvb-bt8xx.o
    > +obj-$(CONFIG_DVB_DST) += dst.o
    > +obj-$(CONFIG_DVB_DST_CA) += dst_ca.o
    >
    > that symbol_request is unable to return a valid pointer if DST an
    > DST_CA aren't selected should be ok because this would only happen if
    > someone didn't compile them in (an appropriate error message should be
    > added for that)
    >
    > I'm trying to look closer at this issue with some other developers, if
    > it's really that easy to split off the dst module from the bt* objects
    > without breaking anything, to me the direction this patch goes seems
    > to be ok, some people stated out that there are problems so I'll try
    > to get more information about that.
    >
    > Markus
    >


    --
    Markus Rechberger
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-04-30 23:19    [W:0.023 / U:63.304 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site