On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 10:47:50AM +1100, Brad Hards wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Mar 2002 09:57, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 09:52:47AM +1100, Brad Hards wrote:
> > > On Tue, 5 Mar 2002 08:47, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 07:39:57AM +1100, Brad Hards wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 5 Mar 2002 06:37, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > > > On Sun, Mar 03, 2002 at 02:33:20AM -0500, Matt Matthews wrote:
> > > > > > > usbmouse                1824   0  (unused)
> > > > > > > usbkbd                  2944   0  (unused)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Can you just delete this modules to prevent them from getting
> > > > > > loaded? You should not need them at all, and if both are loaded
> > > > > > (along with the input drivers, not nice things have been known to
> > > > > > happen.)
> > > > >
> > > > > I think maybe we should look at the Boot Protocol drivers again.
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. We seem to be confusing users, and we likely will get bit-rot on
> > > > > the code 2. We now have dependency on the input drivers (ie. the
> > > > > comments above probably aren't exactly true :). usbkbd no longer
> > > > > calls handle_scancode directly - it gets passed through the input.o
> > > > > and keybdev.o code. 3. The code size difference is there, but it
> > > > > isn't that great.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd like to suggest ripping out the boot protocol drivers, at least
> > > > > in 2.5.
> > > >
> > > > No, they are still needed for some systems.  Think boot disks and other
> > > > space constrained places.
> > >
> > > Is this a real requirement. Space isn't that constrained (bootable
> > > business cards are taking over from floppies), and a quick check:
> > > [bradh@localhost usb]$ ls -l usbkbd.o usbmouse.o hid.o
> > > -rw-rw-r--    1 bradh    bradh       18258 Mar  5 09:27 hid.o
> > > -rw-rw-r--    1 bradh    bradh        5928 Mar  5 09:27 usbkbd.o
> > > -rw-rw-r--    1 bradh    bradh        4464 Mar  5 09:27 usbmouse.o
> > > 8K isn't much for 99% of applications
> >
> > Tell that to the people who have to make distro boot disk images :)
> They already deal with this problem using modules

Those modules are compressed and still placed on the main boot disk
image.  Take a look at the Red Hat install disk for an example.

Other people also need the small size.  A floppy firewall is another
example, as well as an embedded system that needs all the memory it can
get.

> > And remember, the bootable image on a CDROM still has the "old" 1.4Mb
> > floppy size requirements.
> But the driver doesn't have to be built in.

But it needs to be present for the first time user input is needed.

> Err, not so. Boot Protocol is meant to be used where you don't have a HID 
> parser. We do. The whole usbkbd and usbmouse stuff is legacy we don't need.

No, people still need it.  They will not be deleted.


> > > 1. Not support this hardware (relying on BIOS support)
> >
> > Nope, can't do that.  What if we _are_ the BIOS (think Linux BIOS).
> Which could well use a decent HID parser.

Eeek, not a whole HID parser in a BIOS where it is not needed.

> > > 2. Keep the boot protocol driver, but modify it to match on vendor and
> > > product IDs, since these aren't really HID devices (so blacklist them
> > > like the wacom case)
> >
> > Nope, that breaks the USB spec.
> Err, no. The device not working with full HID is in violation of the spec, us 
> taking special action to deal with it isn't.

Well my old keyboard works with both.  I have heard of some devices not
working with both, but they are only rumors :)

So in conclusion, the boot protocol drivers are not going anywhere,
sorry.

greg k-h

_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-users

Reply via email to