Am 22.04.2007 17:17 schrieb Alan Cox:
> Well once it ends up && BROKEN perhaps patches will appear, or before
> that. If not well the pain factor will resolve the problem.
>
>>> No risk of deadlock. It'll progress to && BROKEN which will either cause
>>> sufficient pain for someone to get off
Am 22.04.2007 17:17 schrieb Alan Cox:
Well once it ends up BROKEN perhaps patches will appear, or before
that. If not well the pain factor will resolve the problem.
No risk of deadlock. It'll progress to BROKEN which will either cause
sufficient pain for someone to get off their arse and
Hi Alan,
On 4/22/07, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No risk of deadlock. It'll progress to && BROKEN which will either cause
> > sufficient pain for someone to get off their arse and fix it, for enough
> > of a vendors users to get the vendor to do the work or for someone who
> > cares
> obsolete and correctly re-labelled as such. As for the && !HOTPLUG
> menace you keep touting, that might perhaps be applied to some of
> the individual hardware device drivers but certainly not to the
In my tree its just the drivers that still use pci_find_device.
> > Want to be on that. There
> simple and fundamental (which you haven't answered as yet). Why, or
> rather how, were the writers of newer APIs _allowed_ to push *their*
> stuff into the kernel _without_ even bothering to convert the
> *existing* users of the older APIs in the kernel? This goes against
Because to convert the
Am 22.04.2007 14:58 schrieb Alan Cox:
If it isn't obsolete then fix the code to use the newer APIs
>> Why should that be a precondition for removing the incorrect
>> "obsolete" label?
>
> Because if we remove the obsolete label the users are going to be
> suprised when it goes away entirely
> >> If it isn't obsolete then fix the code to use the newer APIs
>
> Why should that be a precondition for removing the incorrect
> "obsolete" label?
Because if we remove the obsolete label the users are going to be
suprised when it goes away entirely with && BROKEN or && !HOTPLUG or
similar.
Am 22.04.2007 00:10 schrieb David Miller:
> From: Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 21:58:44 +0100
>
>> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 15:07:51 +0200
>> Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> From: Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>
>>> The "obsolete" label on the ISDN_I4L
Am 22.04.2007 00:10 schrieb David Miller:
From: Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 21:58:44 +0100
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 15:07:51 +0200
Tilman Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Tilman Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The obsolete label on the ISDN_I4L Kconfig option is not, and
If it isn't obsolete then fix the code to use the newer APIs
Why should that be a precondition for removing the incorrect
obsolete label?
Because if we remove the obsolete label the users are going to be
suprised when it goes away entirely with BROKEN or !HOTPLUG or
similar.
to end up
Am 22.04.2007 14:58 schrieb Alan Cox:
If it isn't obsolete then fix the code to use the newer APIs
Why should that be a precondition for removing the incorrect
obsolete label?
Because if we remove the obsolete label the users are going to be
suprised when it goes away entirely with BROKEN
simple and fundamental (which you haven't answered as yet). Why, or
rather how, were the writers of newer APIs _allowed_ to push *their*
stuff into the kernel _without_ even bothering to convert the
*existing* users of the older APIs in the kernel? This goes against
Because to convert the
obsolete and correctly re-labelled as such. As for the !HOTPLUG
menace you keep touting, that might perhaps be applied to some of
the individual hardware device drivers but certainly not to the
In my tree its just the drivers that still use pci_find_device.
Want to be on that. There is
Hi Alan,
On 4/22/07, Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No risk of deadlock. It'll progress to BROKEN which will either cause
sufficient pain for someone to get off their arse and fix it, for enough
of a vendors users to get the vendor to do the work or for someone who
cares to pay a
From: Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 21:58:44 +0100
> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 15:07:51 +0200
> Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > From: Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > The "obsolete" label on the ISDN_I4L Kconfig option is not, and
> > has never been,
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 15:07:51 +0200
Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> The "obsolete" label on the ISDN_I4L Kconfig option is not, and
> has never been, accurate. It has already prompted repeated attempts
> to remove actively used
From: Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The "obsolete" label on the ISDN_I4L Kconfig option is not, and
has never been, accurate. It has already prompted repeated attempts
to remove actively used functionality from the kernel without a
working replacement. This patch removes the incorrect label
From: Tilman Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The obsolete label on the ISDN_I4L Kconfig option is not, and
has never been, accurate. It has already prompted repeated attempts
to remove actively used functionality from the kernel without a
working replacement. This patch removes the incorrect label and
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 15:07:51 +0200
Tilman Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Tilman Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The obsolete label on the ISDN_I4L Kconfig option is not, and
has never been, accurate. It has already prompted repeated attempts
to remove actively used functionality from the
From: Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 21:58:44 +0100
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 15:07:51 +0200
Tilman Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Tilman Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The obsolete label on the ISDN_I4L Kconfig option is not, and
has never been, accurate. It has
20 matches
Mail list logo
