On Tue, May 23, 2000 at 06:35:09PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > - reduce the memory size of the kernel footprint if you are only going to
> > > use a device that requires a firmware download every once in a while,
> > > but are going to use your Visor all the time.
> >
> > I'd still consider memory cheap these days for any system capable of
> > supporting a usb controller. Making them seperate modules has my
> > vote.
>
> Memory is not cheap on embedded and hand held systems that will run USB.
> Firmware via userspace seems the
> best approach
I agree firmware via userspace is the best approach, but we're not there
yet today (and when that functionality is there, I will be one of the
first to port the usb-serial drivers to use it too.)
> > If a vendor wants to ship binary only drivers for a serial adaptor,
> > let them, they're likely to have to invest -more- work on their driver
> > because they'll have to do the porting/testing/maintenance/bugfixes
>
> They'll rapidly give up. The Linux API is stable for stable releases (except
> when we cant avoid it) the ABI is dependant on about 20 variables including
> compiler revision. They are their own problem and shouldnt colour decisions
> being made about the right technical solution
The API and binary driver issue shouldn't be involved in this question,
I just brought it up as one of the side effects of this proposed change.
I want to do the right technical solution. That's why I am asking. Does
anyone have any objections to me doing things this way (making the
usb-serial drivers able to be separate modules) as far as technical
issues go?
thanks,
greg k-h
greg@(kroah|wirex).com
(sitting in a sea of boxes...)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
