> > Let's restart this discussion and focus on the main roadblock (others
> > are minor details which can be sorted out later).
> > 
> > If it feels like a hack, the key issue seems to me to be the choice of
> > the API to present the GPS data to user space. Right?
> Or even more fundamentally, does this belong in the kernel at all?

Yes, it does.

> Given that we'd still depend on gpsd and other, proprietary, daemons to
> actually parse and use (also for control) the plethora of GPS protocols
> available, it may even be best to just keep it all in user space.

No. We'd want to move away from gpsd in the long
term. (/dev/input/mice was in similar situation.)

> Now, if we'd ever have a proper GPS framework that handled everything in
> kernel space (i.e. no more gpsd) then we would be able to write kernel
> drivers that also take care of PM. But perhaps that's unlikely to ever
> be realised given the state of things (proprietary protocols, numerous
> quirky implementations, etc).

That is what needs to happen.

> The kernel is probably not the place to be working around issues like
> that, even if serdev at least allows for such hacks to be fairly
> isolated in drivers (unlike some of the earlier proposals touching core
> code).

Oh, kernel is indeed right place to provide hardware abstraction --
and that includes bug workarounds.

We'd like unmodified userspace to run on any supported hardware,

(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to