From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rt2x00: Implement support for rt2800pci
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:19:23 +0200
Cc: Ivo van Doorn <ivdoorn@gmail.com>,
	John Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
	linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, users@rt2x00.serialmonkey.com,
	Alban Browaeys <prahal@yahoo.com>,
	Benoit PAPILLAULT <benoit.papillault@free.fr>,
	Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>,
	Luis Correia <luis.f.correia@gmail.com>,
	Mattias Nissler <mattias.nissler@gmx.de>,
	Mark Asselstine <asselsm@gmail.com>,
	Xose Vazquez Perez <xose.vazquez@gmail.com>,
	"linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <200910152137.58164.IvDoorn@gmail.com> <200910171654.03344.bzolnier@gmail.com> <1255792104.3434.2.camel@johannes.local>
In-Reply-To: <1255792104.3434.2.camel@johannes.local>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <200910171719.24093.bzolnier@gmail.com>
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Saturday 17 October 2009 17:08:24 Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-10-17 at 16:54 +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> 
> > I also used the opportunity to take a closer look at this driver and
> > it seems that it needlessly adds around 2 KLOC to kernel by duplicating
> > the common content of rt2800usb.h to rt2800pci.h instead of moving it
> > to the shared header (like it is done in the staging crap drivers):
> 
> Tell me you're kidding -- comparing 2k duplicated LOC with a driver that
> ships its own wifi stack?

Why would I be?

1) The patch is submitted to kernel _proper_ not kernel staging so I see
no excuse for duplicating 2-4 KLOC and it should be fixed.

2) The fact that the some staging driver consists in 90% of crap doesn't
mean that it doesn't have some good design ideas..  (i.e. abstracting chipset
registers access in a discussed case)