[NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-12-15 Thread Patrick van de Lageweg
Hi Linus, This is the driver for the Fujitsu Firestream atm cards (fs50 and fs155). Please consider including this driver in the tree. Thanks Patrick diff -u -r linux-2.4.0-test13-pre1.clean/Documentation/Configure.help

[NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-12-15 Thread Patrick van de Lageweg
Hi Linus, This is the driver for the Fujitsu Firestream atm cards (fs50 and fs155). Please consider including this driver in the tree. Thanks Patrick diff -u -r linux-2.4.0-test13-pre1.clean/Documentation/Configure.help

[NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-12-12 Thread Patrick van de Lageweg
Hi Linus, This is the driver for the Fujitsu Firestream atm cards (fs50 and fs155). Please consider including this driver in the tree. Thanks Patrick diff -u -r --new-file linux-2.4.0-test11.clean/Documentation/Configure.help linux-2.4.0-test11.fs50/Documentation/Configure.help ---

[NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-12-12 Thread Patrick van de Lageweg
Hi Linus, This is the driver for the Fujitsu Firestream atm cards (fs50 and fs155). Please consider including this driver in the tree. Thanks Patrick diff -u -r --new-file linux-2.4.0-test11.clean/Documentation/Configure.help linux-2.4.0-test11.fs50/Documentation/Configure.help ---

[NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-12-06 Thread Patrick van de Lageweg
Hi Linus, This is the driver for the Fujitsu Firestream atm cards (fs50 and fs155). Please consider including this driver in the tree. Thanks Patrick diff -u -r --new-file linux-2.4.0-test11.clean/Documentation/Configure.help linux-2.4.0-test11.fs50/Documentation/Configure.help

[NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-12-06 Thread Patrick van de Lageweg
Hi Linus, This is the driver for the Fujitsu Firestream atm cards (fs50 and fs155). Please consider including this driver in the tree. Thanks Patrick diff -u -r --new-file linux-2.4.0-test11.clean/Documentation/Configure.help linux-2.4.0-test11.fs50/Documentation/Configure.help

[NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-29 Thread Patrick van de Lageweg
Hi Linus, This is the driver for the Fujitsu Firestream atm cards (fs50 and fs155). Please consider including this driver in the tree. Thanks Patrick diff -u -r --new-file linux-2.4.0-test11.clean/Documentation/Configure.help linux-2.4.0-test11.fs50/Documentation/Configure.help ---

[NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-29 Thread Patrick van de Lageweg
Hi Linus, This is the driver for the Fujitsu Firestream atm cards (fs50 and fs155). Please consider including this driver in the tree. Thanks Patrick diff -u -r --new-file linux-2.4.0-test11.clean/Documentation/Configure.help linux-2.4.0-test11.fs50/Documentation/Configure.help ---

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-23 Thread Rogier Wolff
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > You may also consider processing firestream.[ch] through indent because > spacing is inconsistent - sometimes tabs, sometimes 8*space (it would > be nice too have tabs everywhere). As far as I know the tabs/spaces are exactly the way I want them. There are

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-23 Thread Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
Hi! Just a few hints on __init/__exit stuff... On Wed, 22 Nov 2000, Patrick van de Lageweg wrote: > +struct reginit_item PHY_NTC_INIT[] = { Can be marked __initdata > +void undocumented_pci_fix (struct pci_dev *pdev) Can be marked __init > +void write_phy (struct fs_dev *dev, int regnum,

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-23 Thread Peter Samuelson
[Rogier Wolff] > > > +MODULE_PARM(fs_debug, "i"); > > > > There's no reason to wrap these "MODULE_PARM"s inside an "#ifdef MODULE". > anymore in 2.4 ^^^2.2 Verified in 2.2.0 (the oldest tree I have). Peter - To unsubscribe from this

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-23 Thread Werner Almesberger
Mitchell Blank Jr wrote: > * I don't like header files that define the registers of the chip - since > the header file is only included in the driver's .c For a non-hypothetical case why it makes sense to have such things in their own header file: if you dig out some older versions of the

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-23 Thread Rogier Wolff
Mitchell Blank Jr wrote: > > +MODULE_PARM(fs_debug, "i"); > > There's no reason to wrap these "MODULE_PARM"s inside an "#ifdef MODULE". anymore in 2.4 OK. > > +#define MIN(a,b) (((a)<(b))?(a):(b)) > > You don't seem to ever use this definition. H. Used to

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-23 Thread Vojtech Pavlik
On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 09:22:09AM +0100, Rogier Wolff wrote: > Peter Samuelson wrote: > > > > +int loopback = 0; > > > +int fs_debug = 0; > > > +struct fs_dev *fs_boards = NULL; > > > Aside from the 'static' issue already mentioned, these should be left > > uninitialized. ('gcc

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-23 Thread Peter Samuelson
[Rogier Wolff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] > However, if my code assumes that the compiler needs to initialize the kernel > variable one way or another, I want to put in the initialization, > even if that means an "= 0;" which is already the default. Well,

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-23 Thread Rogier Wolff
Peter Samuelson wrote: > > +int loopback = 0; > > +int fs_debug = 0; > > +struct fs_dev *fs_boards = NULL; > Aside from the 'static' issue already mentioned, these should be left > uninitialized. ('gcc -fassume-bss-zero' would be nice, but then again > in userspace it rarely matters.) Hi

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-23 Thread Rogier Wolff
Peter Samuelson wrote: +int loopback = 0; +int fs_debug = 0; +struct fs_dev *fs_boards = NULL; Aside from the 'static' issue already mentioned, these should be left uninitialized. ('gcc -fassume-bss-zero' would be nice, but then again in userspace it rarely matters.) Hi Peter,

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-23 Thread Peter Samuelson
[Rogier Wolff [EMAIL PROTECTED]] However, if my code assumes that the compiler needs to initialize the kernel variable one way or another, I want to put in the initialization, even if that means an "= 0;" which is already the default. Well, your

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-23 Thread Vojtech Pavlik
On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 09:22:09AM +0100, Rogier Wolff wrote: Peter Samuelson wrote: +int loopback = 0; +int fs_debug = 0; +struct fs_dev *fs_boards = NULL; Aside from the 'static' issue already mentioned, these should be left uninitialized. ('gcc -fassume-bss-zero' would be

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-23 Thread Rogier Wolff
Mitchell Blank Jr wrote: +MODULE_PARM(fs_debug, "i"); There's no reason to wrap these "MODULE_PARM"s inside an "#ifdef MODULE". anymore in 2.4 OK. +#define MIN(a,b) (((a)(b))?(a):(b)) You don't seem to ever use this definition. H. Used to though.. ;-)

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-23 Thread Werner Almesberger
Mitchell Blank Jr wrote: * I don't like header files that define the registers of the chip - since the header file is only included in the driver's .c For a non-hypothetical case why it makes sense to have such things in their own header file: if you dig out some older versions of the

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-23 Thread Peter Samuelson
[Rogier Wolff] +MODULE_PARM(fs_debug, "i"); There's no reason to wrap these "MODULE_PARM"s inside an "#ifdef MODULE". anymore in 2.4 ^^^2.2 Verified in 2.2.0 (the oldest tree I have). Peter - To unsubscribe from this list: send

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-23 Thread Rogier Wolff
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: You may also consider processing firestream.[ch] through indent because spacing is inconsistent - sometimes tabs, sometimes 8*space (it would be nice too have tabs everywhere). As far as I know the tabs/spaces are exactly the way I want them. There are tabs

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-22 Thread Peter Samuelson
[Patrick van de Lageweg] > diff -u -r --new-file linux-2.4.0-test11.clean/drivers/atm/firestream.c >linux-2.4.0-test11.fs50+atmrefcount/drivers/atm/firestream.c Since you are submitting in the form of a source patch, you ought to include the relevent bits of drivers/atm/Makefile

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-22 Thread Jeff Garzik
Jes Sorensen wrote: > I think the most important issue is when doing header files to make > sure they go with the driver code and not in include/linux unless > there really is a reason to expose them to user space. No reason to > export register definitions for Ethernet cards down there. Agreed,

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-22 Thread Jes Sorensen
> "Rogier" == Rogier Wolff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Rogier> Mitchell Blank Jr wrote: >> First, I'd like to make a couple points about driver style that I'm >> trying to move towards with the ATM drivers. You're free to take >> them or leave them, but I want to eventually move the tree in

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-22 Thread Rogier Wolff
Mitchell Blank Jr wrote: > First, I'd like to make a couple points about driver style that I'm trying > to move towards with the ATM drivers. You're free to take them or leave > them, but I want to eventually move the tree in this direction. > * I don't like header files that define the

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-22 Thread Mitchell Blank Jr
First, I'd like to make a couple points about driver style that I'm trying to move towards with the ATM drivers. You're free to take them or leave them, but I want to eventually move the tree in this direction. * I don't like header files that define the registers of the chip - since the

[NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-22 Thread Patrick van de Lageweg
Hi Linus, This is the driver for the Fujitsu Firestream atm cards (fs50 and fs155). Please consider including this driver in the tree. Thanks Patrick diff -u -r --new-file linux-2.4.0-test11.clean/drivers/atm/firestream.c

[NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-22 Thread Patrick van de Lageweg
Hi Linus, This is the driver for the Fujitsu Firestream atm cards (fs50 and fs155). Please consider including this driver in the tree. Thanks Patrick diff -u -r --new-file linux-2.4.0-test11.clean/drivers/atm/firestream.c

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-22 Thread Mitchell Blank Jr
First, I'd like to make a couple points about driver style that I'm trying to move towards with the ATM drivers. You're free to take them or leave them, but I want to eventually move the tree in this direction. * I don't like header files that define the registers of the chip - since the

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-22 Thread Rogier Wolff
Mitchell Blank Jr wrote: First, I'd like to make a couple points about driver style that I'm trying to move towards with the ATM drivers. You're free to take them or leave them, but I want to eventually move the tree in this direction. * I don't like header files that define the registers

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-22 Thread Jes Sorensen
"Rogier" == Rogier Wolff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Rogier Mitchell Blank Jr wrote: First, I'd like to make a couple points about driver style that I'm trying to move towards with the ATM drivers. You're free to take them or leave them, but I want to eventually move the tree in this

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-22 Thread Jeff Garzik
Jes Sorensen wrote: I think the most important issue is when doing header files to make sure they go with the driver code and not in include/linux unless there really is a reason to expose them to user space. No reason to export register definitions for Ethernet cards down there. Agreed,

Re: [NEW DRIVER] firestream

2000-11-22 Thread Peter Samuelson
[Patrick van de Lageweg] diff -u -r --new-file linux-2.4.0-test11.clean/drivers/atm/firestream.c linux-2.4.0-test11.fs50+atmrefcount/drivers/atm/firestream.c Since you are submitting in the form of a source patch, you ought to include the relevent bits of drivers/atm/Makefile