On 07/15/2012 08:21 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > On Thursday 12 July 2012 16:05:47 Eric Ding wrote: >> So... now what, then? Who decides which is the better of two evils: >> obvious code duplication vs. layering violation? FWIW, it does seem >> like the number of Logitech webcams which aren't USB_CLASS_VIDEO is >> finite, including only older webcams, so perhaps listing "every buggy >> webcam made by Logitech" in two places (one in UVC code, one in USB core >> code) is not an invitation for long-term code maintenance nightmares. > > I'm fine with both solutions. Handling the quirks in the USB core has my > preference, as it would ensure that no race condition will cause any issue at > probe time.
So who actually writes an appropriate patch? Like I said before, I'm no kernel hacker, so I think it's best if someone more familiar with this code than I am actually moves forward with the code mods... :-) Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
