Robert Love wrote:
On Fri, 2005-08-26 at 20:55 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:I think that should be fixed before its merged.Let me be clear, it has an init routine that effectively probes for the device. It just lacks a simple quick non-invasive check.
Since such a check is possible, that's definitely a merge-stopper IMO Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [patch] IBM HDAPS accelerometer driver.
- From: Robert Love <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] IBM HDAPS accelerometer driver.
- References:
- [patch] IBM HDAPS accelerometer driver.
- From: Robert Love <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] IBM HDAPS accelerometer driver.
- From: Brian Gerst <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] IBM HDAPS accelerometer driver.
- From: Robert Love <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] IBM HDAPS accelerometer driver.
- From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] IBM HDAPS accelerometer driver.
- From: Robert Love <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] IBM HDAPS accelerometer driver.
- From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] IBM HDAPS accelerometer driver.
- From: Robert Love <[email protected]>
- [patch] IBM HDAPS accelerometer driver.
- Prev by Date: Re: kgdb on EM64T
- Next by Date: Re: Need better is_better_time_interpolator() algorithm
- Previous by thread: Re: [patch] IBM HDAPS accelerometer driver.
- Next by thread: Re: [patch] IBM HDAPS accelerometer driver.
- Index(es):
