Jesse Huang wrote:
Hi John:
I will try mutt or mail when i want to send next patch. Most different of
ip100a.c
and sundance.c are almost same only fix some bugs. The different of ip100a
and ip100 is in phy. We can use one driver to support those two device, I
want
to know what is better for kernel:
1. Only updata sundance.c to support IP100A
2. Release ip100a.c which support ip100(sundance) to kernel 2.6.x and ask to
remove sundance.c.
3. Release ip100a.c with sundance.c both to kernel 2.6.x
We hope to use IP100a.c as our product driver, so 2. and 3. will better for
IC Plus. But we will still follow your suggestion, if you feel 1. was better
for kernel.
Although it is occasionally OK to duplicate a driver, I do not see a
compelling case with ip100a.
The stronger case for a single codebase is won on the strengths of lower
long-term maintenance costs, increased strength of review, doesn't break
existing sundance driver uses, and re-use of existing testing benefits.
If you feel strongly about not showing "sundance" to your users, you can
always submit a one-line MODULE_ALIAS() change which permits users to
load "ip100a" (really sundance.c). Using MODULE_ALIAS() seems quite
reasonable, given that IC Plus appears to be taking the lead in future
Sundance-like chip development.
So, please resubmit as changes to the existing sundance.c. This is
better for the standard Linux kernel engineering process.
Thanks,
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
