Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 15 Jul 2002 23:13:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 15 Jul 2002 23:13:18 -0400 Received: from [193.14.93.89] ([193.14.93.89]:47876 "HELO acolyte.hack.org") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Mon, 15 Jul 2002 23:13:18 -0400 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: schilling@fokus.gmd.de Subject: Re: IDE/ATAPI in 2.5 References: <200207151326.g6FDQ8nH020722@burner.fokus.gmd.de> From: Christer Weinigel In-Reply-To: Joerg Schilling's message of "Mon, 15 Jul 2002 15:26:08 +0200 (CEST)" User-Agent: Gnus/5.0806 (Gnus v5.8.6) Emacs/20.5 Date: 16 Jul 2002 05:16:10 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1134 Lines: 21 [Joerg, sorry about the two copies, I'm new to gnus and missed that I have to do a wide reply] Joerg Schilling writes: > As my textual description has not been read, here comes a acsii art > of the proposal for a driver structure: So what you are suggesting is a lot of layering between the clients and the hardware. If you look at the history of Linux I would regard most of the "middle layer" code as failures, what one does end up with is a middle layer that is some sort of least common denominator that makes noone happy. A much better choice is to place common code (what usually ends up in a middle layer) in a library, so that a driver can choose either to use the common code, or to implement its own better version that can take advantage of the hardware if possible. /Christer -- "Just how much can I get away with and still go to heaven?" - 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/