Darren J Moffat wrote:
> Felix Feng wrote:
>> Darren J Moffat ??:
>>> Frank Che wrote:
>>>> I'm sponsoring this case for Felix Feng. It is to provide a new
>>>> wireless driver, uath(7D), for Atheros AR5523 USB wireless devices.
>>>> The requested release binding is patch/micro.
>>>>
>>>> I have marked it as "closed approved automatic" since the change is
>>>> straightforward and the interface is clear. If there is request,
>>>> I'd be
>>>> happy to upgrade it to a fast track and set the timer.
>>>
>>> Why is a different driver required just because this is USB rather
>>> than PCI attached ?
>>>
>> Not just the difference of interface. Please see the details below.
>> 1. The uath driver supports atheros5k USB chipset. The ath driver
>> supports ath5k PCI/PCI-E chipset. They are two different series.
>> 2. The uath driver need to download firmware to initial hardware. But
>> ath driver do not need to do so. And the hardware operation is
>> different.
>> 3. The whole working mechanism is different between uath driver and
>> ath driver. The uath driver depends on USBA. But the ath driver
>> relies on PCI configuration.
>> 4. For the same part of wifi driver, it has been abstracted as
>> net80211 module.
>
> Okay I'm happy.
>
> For future it would be really helpful if that type of information was
> in the fast track. We keep seeing cases like this were there are
> different drivers for what initially appears like similar hardware
> with different bus connection types and someone invariably asks the
> same question I did.
>
The question is meaningful only when the bus types are reasonably
similar. PCI, PCIe, cardbus, and maybe even ISA and PCMCIA.
Folks reviewing this things need to understand that USB so alien that it
never makes sense to share a driver between USB and any of the other
"normal" busses. (It might make sense with another serial bus, say
1394, but even that seems a stretch, since USB and 1394 have their own
totally separate bus frameworks.)
-- Garrett
