Return-path: Received: from ra.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.52]:4087 "EHLO ra.tuxdriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753356AbXH3NPU (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 09:15:20 -0400 Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 08:36:09 -0400 From: "John W. Linville" To: Nick Kossifidis Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Jiri Slaby , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] Net: ath5k, kconfig changes Message-ID: <20070830123609.GA5140@tuxdriver.com> References: <2713029743177393055@pripojeni.net> <280951420471148977@pripojeni.net> <20070828171330.GD29343@infradead.org> <40f31dec0708291838p5d33eb34p3b4432d9d270841a@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <40f31dec0708291838p5d33eb34p3b4432d9d270841a@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 04:38:09AM +0300, Nick Kossifidis wrote: > 2007/8/28, Christoph Hellwig : > > Also this whole patch seems rather pointless. It saves only > > very little and turns the driver into a complete ifdef maze. > Also most > people will use 5212 code only, 5211 cards are on some old laptops and > 5210, well i couldn't even find a 5210 for actual testing :P FWIW, I'd bet dollars to donuts that distros will enable them all together. Is saving code space the only reason to turn these off? How much space do you save? Is there some way you can isolate and/or limit the number of ifdef blocks further? If so, we might consider a version of this patch that depends on EMBEDDED or somesuch...? John -- John W. Linville linville@tuxdriver.com