On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 12:26 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Did you ever get back to updating this patchset?
No, unfortunately. I got mostly talked out of writing the driver that
I wanted to write that uses it, and I've been swamped with other
stuff.
--Andy
--
Andy Lutomirski
AMA Capital Man
Did you ever get back to updating this patchset?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Hi
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:44 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> This isn't adequately tested, and I don't have a demonstration (yet).
> It's here for review for whether it's a good idea in the first place
> and for weather the fully_dynamic mechanism is a good idea.
>
> The current character device
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 03:44:05PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> This isn't adequately tested, and I don't have a demonstration (yet).
> It's here for review for whether it's a good idea in the first place
> and for weather the fully_dynamic mechanism is a good idea.
Sorry for the long delay.
I
> Thoughts? I want to use this for the u2f driver, which will either be
> a chardev driver in its own right or use a simple new iso7816 class.
>
> Ideally we could convert a bunch of drivers to use this, at least
> where there are no legacy minor number considerations.
I'd really like to see a f
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 05:16:28PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> Quick ping: does anyone want to review this?
Yes, sorry, I'm still way behind on my patch queue review, want to get
to this this week.
greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body
Quick ping: does anyone want to review this?
--Andy
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> This isn't adequately tested, and I don't have a demonstration (yet).
> It's here for review for whether it's a good idea in the first place
> and for weather the fully_dynamic mechanism
Quick ping: does anyone want to review this?
--Andy
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> This isn't adequately tested, and I don't have a demonstration (yet).
> It's here for review for whether it's a good idea in the first place
> and for weather the fully_dynamic mechanism
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 03:44:05PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> This isn't adequately tested, and I don't have a demonstration (yet).
>> It's here for review for whether it's a good idea in the first place
>> and for weather the full
On Tue, 10 Feb 2015, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> This isn't adequately tested, and I don't have a demonstration (yet).
> It's here for review for whether it's a good idea in the first place
> and for weather the fully_dynamic mechanism is a good idea.
[ ... snip ... ]
> Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 03:44:05PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> This isn't adequately tested, and I don't have a demonstration (yet).
> It's here for review for whether it's a good idea in the first place
> and for weather the fully_dynamic mechanism is a good idea.
>
> The current character de
This isn't adequately tested, and I don't have a demonstration (yet).
It's here for review for whether it's a good idea in the first place
and for weather the fully_dynamic mechanism is a good idea.
The current character device interfaces are IMO awful. There's a
reservation mechanism (alloc_chrd
12 matches
Mail list logo
