Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753830AbZK1Tsa (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Nov 2009 14:48:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753561AbZK1Ts3 (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Nov 2009 14:48:29 -0500 Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8]:48661 "EHLO einhorn.in-berlin.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753500AbZK1Ts2 (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Nov 2009 14:48:28 -0500 X-Envelope-From: stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de Message-ID: <4B117E76.4000109@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:48:06 +0100 From: Stefan Richter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20091025 SeaMonkey/1.1.18 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jon Smirl CC: Maxim Levitsky , Krzysztof Halasa , Christoph Bartelmus , jarod@wilsonet.com, awalls@radix.net, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, j@jannau.net, jarod@redhat.com, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, mchehab@redhat.com, superm1@ubuntu.com Subject: Re: [RFC] What are the goals for the architecture of an in-kernel IR system? References: <9e4733910911270757j648e39ecl7487b7e6c43db828@mail.gmail.com> <1259370501.11155.14.camel@maxim-laptop> <1259419368.18747.0.camel@maxim-laptop> <1259422559.18747.6.camel@maxim-laptop> <9e4733910911280845y5cf06836l1640e9fc8b1740cf@mail.gmail.com> <1259433959.3658.0.camel@maxim-laptop> <9e4733910911281056s77e9bc8frd9200a81ebab8d7e@mail.gmail.com> <4B117A4C.1070304@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <9e4733910911281132m5d0cce31t5544c5a6361813bd@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <9e4733910911281132m5d0cce31t5544c5a6361813bd@mail.gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1604 Lines: 33 Jon Smirl wrote: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Stefan Richter > wrote: >> Jon Smirl wrote: >>> If these drivers are for specific USB devices it is straight forward >>> to turn them into kernel based drivers. If we are going for plug and >>> play this needs to happen. All USB device drivers can be implemented >>> in user space, but that doesn't mean you want to do that. Putting >>> device drivers in the kernel subjects them to code inspection, they >>> get shipped everywhere, they autoload when the device is inserted, >>> they participate in suspend/resume, etc. >> Huh? Userspace implementations /can/ be code-reviewed (but they can't >> crash your machine), they /can/ be and are shipped everywhere, they /do/ >> auto-load when the device is inserted. And if there should be an issue >> with power management (is there any?), then improve the ABI and libusb >> can surely be improved. I don't see why a device with a userspace >> driver cannot be included in power management. > > If you want a micro-kernel there are plenty to pick from. Linux has > chosen not to be a micro-kernel. The Linux model is device drivers in > the kernel. Total nonsense. Neither am I arguing for a micro-kernel, nor are userspace drivers alien to Linux. Not at all. -- Stefan Richter -=====-==--= =-== ===-- http://arcgraph.de/sr/ -- 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/