Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760198AbWLFFg1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Dec 2006 00:36:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760229AbWLFFg0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Dec 2006 00:36:26 -0500 Received: from adelie.ubuntu.com ([82.211.81.139]:56154 "EHLO adelie.ubuntu.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760232AbWLFFfy convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Dec 2006 00:35:54 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] New firewire stack From: Ben Collins To: Kristian =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F8gsberg?= Cc: Alexey Dobriyan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Stefan Richter In-Reply-To: <4575FF08.2030100@redhat.com> References: <20061205052229.7213.38194.stgit@dinky.boston.redhat.com> <20061205184921.GA5029@martell.zuzino.mipt.ru> <4575FF08.2030100@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2006 00:35:49 -0500 Message-Id: <1165383349.7443.78.camel@gullible> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2162 Lines: 43 On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 18:21 -0500, Kristian H?gsberg wrote: > Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 12:22:29AM -0500, Kristian H?gsberg wrote: > >> I'm announcing an alternative firewire stack that I've been working on > >> the last few weeks. > > > > Is mainline firewire so hopeless, that you've decided to rewrite it? Could > > you show some ugly places in it? > > Yes. I'm not doing this lightheartedly. It's a lot of work and it will > introduce regressions and instability for a little while. > > My main point about ohci1394 (the old stacks PCI driver) is, that if you > really want to fix the issues with this driver, you have to shuffle the code > around so much that you'll introduce as many regressions as a clean rewrite. > The big problems in the ohci1394 drivers is the irq_handler, bus reset > handling and config rom handling. These are some of the strong points of > fw-ohci.c: My main concern is that when I picked up ieee1394 maint myself, it was because it was not big-endian or 64-bit friendly. I spent the better part of 3 months getting this right on PPC and UltraSPARC. Not because it's hard to fix these issues, but because the hardware is not well defined for a lot of these cases (I know you've seen the ohci1394 code to handle endianness). So while I can understand that ieee1394 doesn't have much man power right now, and that there are some hard to find bugs in the current tree, I can't see how starting from scratch alleviates this. The tree is years old, and a lot of work has been put into it (lots of my work, I'll admit I'm being a little protective). I'm not sure that "replacing" it is wise, or even needed. Fork it, clean it up, but rewriting just doesn't make sense. Granted, this is your time, and you can spend it how you want, I just don't want to see the ieee1394 stack take a step backwards in the hopes that it will be better a year down the road. - 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/