Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751933AbaGJRIe (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jul 2014 13:08:34 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:57590 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751364AbaGJRId (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jul 2014 13:08:33 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 10:08:13 -0700 From: Greg KH To: One Thousand Gnomes Cc: "Matwey V. Kornilov" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-parport@lists.infradead.org, hsommer@eso.org, matwey.kornilov@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 2/2] Add force_epp module option for parport_pc. Message-ID: <20140710170813.GA23544@kroah.com> References: <20140709212910.GB26562@kroah.com> <20140710165225.0991f478@alan.etchedpixels.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140710165225.0991f478@alan.etchedpixels.co.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 04:52:25PM +0100, One Thousand Gnomes wrote: > > module parameters are horrid, how is someone supposed to know to use > > this? Why can't we "fix" the detection logic? You just now broke > > systems that were working by forcing them to now set a module option > > where previously they didn't, so I can't take these patches as-is, > > sorry. > > Can we not just add "if the CPU is PPro or higher than all is fine" ? to > the test ? That sounds reasonable to me. greg k-h -- 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/