On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 09:02:20AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 05:43 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 05:36:48PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 13:59 -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > > > > /* The first entry is a placeholder for the insmod-specified device */
> > > > > - { USB_DEVICE(0x049F, 0x0003) },
> > > >
> > > > Is it obvious why this patch is correct? Especially given the
> > > > comment just before the line you delete, and the code
> > > >
> > > > if (vendor) {
> > > > ipaq_id_table[0].idVendor = vendor;
> > > > ipaq_id_table[0].idProduct = product;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > in ipaq_init()?
> > >
> > > My mistake, quick on the patching going through this dupe list.
> > >
> > > Might I add that this is terrible use of the device table, though.
> > > Clutters userspace, and adds processing to module-init-tools programs.
> >
> > It's a hold-over from the times when we didn't have the sysfs "add a new
> > id" interface for usb-serial drivers, which only recently was created.
> >
> > So we just have to live with it, and the infinitesimal speed hit it
> > creates :)
>
> Any objection to adding it to planned-for-removal and spitting out a
> printk when someone uses the "feature"?
No, it's a module parameter and it's much easier to use for some systems
than the sysfs file way. It's just not worth breaking userspace APIs
for no good reason.
thanks,
greg k-h
-
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]
