Re: [patch 1/3] Input: psmouse - create PS/2 protocol options for Kconfig

["Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>]

On 2/16/07, Andres Salomon <dilinger@debian.org> wrote:
> Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On Thursday 15 February 2007 20:30, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >> On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 19:55:29 -0500
> >> Andres Salomon <dilinger@debian.org> wrote:
> [...]
> >> Perhaps a nicer implementation would be to have a separate .c file for each
> >> variant.
> >>
> >
> > Having completely separate sub-drivers is very hard because of very delicate
> > PS/2 protocol probing....
> >
> > What do you think about patch below? It somewhat reduces #ifdef clutter in main
> > module moving it in .h files...
> >
>
> Normally, I'm a fan of that sort of thing.  However, in this case, I
> think it makes sense to have the #ifdefs right in the probe function; at
> least for me, it makes it easier to understand what's going on.  The
> synaptics stuff is especially tricky; with a cursory glance over the
> code, one might assume that all the synaptics functions disappear when
> CONFIG_MOUSE_PS2_SYNAPTICS is unset.  However, if the #ifdef's are in
> the probe function, it's pretty clear that some synaptics functions
> still get called even when CONFIG_MOUSE_PS2_SYNAPTICS is unset.

Thit is a valid point but #ifdef maze in the middle of already messy
psmouse-extensions() is too much for me. I guess I will just add a
comment explaining that synaptics probing is really special.

Btw, can I get that OLPC patch when you have time?

--
Dmitry
-
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/