On Fri, 29 Aug 2008, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > Does building a kernel image that can run on different hardware without > > > rebuilding also violate the "relevant standards"? > > > > No. That isn't what Arnd was concerned about. He noted that even if > > you did build multiple modules, only one of them could be loaded at any > > time. > > Well, actually it was exactly what I was concerned about ;-) > > The way I understand the code, it is layered into the hardware specific > part and the protocol specific part, which are connected through > the interfaces I pointed out.
That's right. > The standard requires that there can only be one protocol handler > per physical interface, which is a reasonable limitation. No, you've got it exactly backward. There can be multiple protocol handlers per physical interface, but there must be only one physical interface per device. > However, what the Linux implementation actually enforces is > that there can only be one hardware specific driver built or loaded > into the kernel, which just looks like an arbitrary restriction > that does not actually help. Not at all -- it is an implementation of the constraint that there be only one physical interface. > If the gadget hardware drivers were registering the device with a > gadget_bus_type, you could still enforce the "only one protocol" > rule by binding every protocol to every device in that bus type. There is no such rule. Alan Stern _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev