Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932213AbVKKCJk (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2005 21:09:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751234AbVKKCJj (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2005 21:09:39 -0500 Received: from mailout.stusta.mhn.de ([141.84.69.5]:50440 "HELO mailout.stusta.mhn.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751229AbVKKCJj (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2005 21:09:39 -0500 Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 03:09:38 +0100 From: Adrian Bunk To: Greg KH Cc: Pete Zaitcev , stern@rowland.harvard.edu, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, mdharm-usb@one-eyed-alien.net, Reuben Farrelly Subject: Re: [-mm patch] USB_LIBUSUAL shouldn't be user-visible Message-ID: <20051111020938.GJ5376@stusta.de> References: <20051107215226.GA25104@kroah.com> <20051107222840.GB26417@kroah.com> <20051108004716.GJ3847@stusta.de> <20051109222808.GG9182@kroah.com> <20051109224117.337690bf.zaitcev@redhat.com> <20051110105648.GC5376@stusta.de> <20051110234644.GA6430@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051110234644.GA6430@kroah.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1920 Lines: 52 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 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/