On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 07:24:54PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
How much different hardware does the (old)floppy.c do? I imagine that
today, where floppies phase out, there will be, in descending order:
* USB floppy drives (atm handled by sd.c, could be better to have sf.c)
* FDCs on
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Jan 31 2007 09:58, alan wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Jan 30 2007 14:00, Roland Dreier wrote:
An uncharitable vendor might decide it's not worth publishing specs,
since the Linux guys can reverse engineer the Windows
On Jan 31 2007 13:58, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 07:24:54PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
How much different hardware does the (old)floppy.c do? I imagine that
today, where floppies phase out, there will be, in descending order:
* USB floppy drives (atm handled by sd.c,
Nicolas Mailhot [EMAIL PROTECTED] :
[...]
incomplete NDAed documentation. If (as this offer implies) there are good
driver authors waiting to do more drivering, why aren't those a priority?
So far nobody cared enough to maintain a list of said out-of-tree drivers.
--
Ueimor
-
To unsubscribe
Francois Romieu wrote:
Nicolas Mailhot [EMAIL PROTECTED] :
[...]
incomplete NDAed documentation. If (as this offer implies) there are good
driver authors waiting to do more drivering, why aren't those a priority?
So far nobody cared enough to maintain a list of said out-of-tree drivers.
why
On 1/30/07, Kumar Gala [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Out of interest are you was this geared to any particular SoC's/
architectures?
I had in mind the sort of ARM-, PPC-, and MIPS-based SoCs that wind up
in handhelds, mobiles, set-tops, and consumer-grade WiFi devices.
That's an area I know
Le mercredi 31 janvier 2007 à 20:29 +0100, Francois Romieu a écrit :
Nicolas Mailhot [EMAIL PROTECTED] :
[...]
incomplete NDAed documentation. If (as this offer implies) there are good
driver authors waiting to do more drivering, why aren't those a priority?
So far nobody cared enough to
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 02:06:32PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Hi,
I'd really love if the same offer was extended to GPL out-of-tree driver
trees.
This kind of offer has _always_ been there for out-of-tree GPL drivers.
I have contacted many different groups and driver authors over the
Le mercredi 31 janvier 2007 à 12:12 -0800, Greg KH a écrit :
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 02:06:32PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
[Reordering for the sake of argument]
There are many out-of-tree drivers (ivtv, lirc, various webcam
drivers,
enhanced USB keyboard handlers...) with merging not
On Jan 31 2007 11:54, Auke Kok wrote:
Francois Romieu wrote:
Nicolas Mailhot [EMAIL PROTECTED] :
[...]
incomplete NDAed documentation. If (as this offer implies) there are
good
driver authors waiting to do more drivering, why aren't those a
priority?
So far nobody cared enough to
On Tue, 2007-01-30 21:23:34 +0100, Diego Calleja [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
El Tue, 30 Jan 2007 20:31:01 +0100 (MET), Jan Engelhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
escribió:
Don't they claim 50+? Already browsing
ftp://ftp.de.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/NetBSD-3.1 gives more than 2
screenfuls [à 25].
On Wed, 2007-01-31 19:24:54 +0100, Jan Engelhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How much different hardware does the (old)floppy.c do? I imagine that
today, where floppies phase out, there will be, in descending order:
* USB floppy drives (atm handled by sd.c, could be better to have sf.c)
*
On 2/1/07, Jan Engelhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That lists seems really outdata.
- RaLink has gpl drivers (SerialMonkey maintains a better version),
- Cisco IPSEC can be replaced by the userspace tool vpnc (as far as the VPN
Concentrators I have to deal with),
It's a wiki[1], I invite
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 10:13:12PM +0100, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
On Tue, 2007-01-30 21:23:34 +0100, Diego Calleja [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
El Tue, 30 Jan 2007 20:31:01 +0100 (MET), Jan Engelhardt [EMAIL
PROTECTED] escribió:
Don't they claim 50+? Already browsing
On Wed, 2007-01-31 22:56:03 +0100, Willy Tarreau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 10:13:12PM +0100, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
On Tue, 2007-01-30 21:23:34 +0100, Diego Calleja [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
El Tue, 30 Jan 2007 20:31:01 +0100 (MET), Jan Engelhardt [EMAIL
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 12:12:58PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
There are many out-of-tree drivers (ivtv, lirc, various webcam drivers,
enhanced USB keyboard handlers...) with merging not planified or taking
ages.
See my above comment about lirc. As for the others, everyone
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 17:06:07 -0500 Dave Jones wrote:
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 12:12:58PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
There are many out-of-tree drivers (ivtv, lirc, various webcam drivers,
enhanced USB keyboard handlers...) with merging not planified or taking
ages.
See
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 12:12:58PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
This kind of offer has _always_ been there for out-of-tree GPL drivers.
I have contacted many different groups and driver authors over the years
to offer my help in trying to get their code into the mainline kernel.
Some take me up
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:00:15 -0500 Theodore Tso wrote:
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 12:12:58PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
This kind of offer has _always_ been there for out-of-tree GPL drivers.
I have contacted many different groups and driver authors over the years
to offer my help in trying to
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 06:00:15PM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 12:12:58PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
This kind of offer has _always_ been there for out-of-tree GPL drivers.
I have contacted many different groups and driver authors over the years
to offer my help in
On 1/31/07, Theodore Tso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
More specifically, Dave said that it seemed rude to just take the
driver and send updates, but maybe the best way of dealing with
out-of-tree drivers like lirc is to treat the out-of-tree drivers as a
kind of spec release, and just have someone
On 2/1/07, Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I'm going by Linus's rule here, if a person doesn't want their code
in the kernel tree, then I'm not going to forcefully put it there.
That's just being rude.
Makes sense when you put it that way. However, perhaps an offer to
take over the
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:00:15 -0500 Theodore Tso wrote:
..
More specifically, Dave said that it seemed rude to just take the
driver and send updates, but maybe the best way of dealing with
out-of-tree drivers like lirc is to treat the out-of-tree drivers as a
kind of spec
On 1/31/07, Mark Lord [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:00:15 -0500 Theodore Tso wrote:
..
More specifically, Dave said that it seemed rude to just take the
driver and send updates, but maybe the best way of dealing with
out-of-tree drivers like lirc is to
On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 10:07:53AM +1000, Trent Waddington wrote:
On 2/1/07, Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I'm going by Linus's rule here, if a person doesn't want their code
in the kernel tree, then I'm not going to forcefully put it there.
That's just being rude.
Makes sense when
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 08:41:03PM +0300, Sergei Organov wrote:
Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
And there are plenty of documented devices that no one cares enough
about to submit a driver for.
Any specific examples? I have a long list of people who wish to write
new drivers
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 10:15:20PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le mercredi 31 janvier 2007 ?? 12:12 -0800, Greg KH a ??crit :
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 02:06:32PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
[Reordering for the sake of argument]
There are many out-of-tree drivers (ivtv, lirc, various
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 01:37:58PM -0500, Bob Copeland wrote:
Putting the codingstyle control aside, often it's because things look
too hackish.
Also sometimes the authors know it's hackish, or just don't expect it
to be generally useful to the world. I happen to own an out-of-tree
On Jan 31, 2007, at 12:26 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 06:27:29PM -0800, Michael K. Edwards wrote:
On 1/29/07, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Free Linux Driver Development!
Yes, that's right, the Linux kernel community is offering all
companies
free Linux
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 06:27:29PM -0800, Michael K. Edwards wrote:
> On 1/29/07, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Free Linux Driver Development!
> >
> >Yes, that's right, the Linux kernel community is offering all companies
> >free Linux driver development.
Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> When we switch to PATA and drop old ide stack, what will happen ?
>> Will all driver be ported and full-feature, or some will be obsoleted ?
>
> All drivers for which we can find users will be ported. If any features
> disappear that's a bug.
>
Well, I have a long
On 1/29/07, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Free Linux Driver Development!
Yes, that's right, the Linux kernel community is offering all companies
free Linux driver development. ...
[snip]
[1] for the CPUs that support the bus types that your device works on.
Bravo
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 05:24:28PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 02:13:40AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 11:10:20AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 09:45:50AM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > >...
> > > > And there are plenty of
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 11:19:15AM +1000, Trent Waddington wrote:
> On 1/31/07, Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Would someone from your long list of people e.g. be willing to maintain
> >drivers/block/floppy.c ?
>
> I have a floppy drive! Will have to go buy some disks though. What's
On 1/31/07, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 02:13:40AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 11:10:20AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 09:45:50AM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> >...
> > > And there are plenty of documented devices that
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 05:07:57PM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > > To me, it's clear that historically the community hasn't delivered on
> >
> > How is that clear? As noted in the specific examples I provided, that
> > is how a large number of popular drivers and subsystems have been
> >
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 02:13:40AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 11:10:20AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 09:45:50AM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> >...
> > > And there are plenty of documented devices that no one cares enough
> > > about to submit a driver
On 1/31/07, Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Would someone from your long list of people e.g. be willing to maintain
drivers/block/floppy.c ?
I have a floppy drive! Will have to go buy some disks though. What's
wrong with it?
Trent
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 11:10:20AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 09:45:50AM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
>...
> > And there are plenty of documented devices that no one cares enough
> > about to submit a driver for.
>
> Any specific examples? I have a long list of people who
> > To me, it's clear that historically the community hasn't delivered on
>
> How is that clear? As noted in the specific examples I provided, that
> is how a large number of popular drivers and subsystems have been
> developed.
Yes, I agree that it often works. What I'm arguing is that
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 07:16:39PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> The only difference between Greg's offer and offers made by other
> developers to vendors is that his was public on LKML, and the subject
> line concluded with an exclamation point.
Heh, never underestimate a well-placed ! :)
Roland Dreier wrote:
To me, it's clear that historically the community hasn't delivered on
How is that clear? As noted in the specific examples I provided, that
is how a large number of popular drivers and subsystems have been developed.
this. So I don't like promising something that we
On 1/31/07, Roland Dreier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To me, it's clear that historically the community hasn't delivered on
this. So I don't like promising something that we haven't been able
to follow through on in the past. If a vendor takes Greg's offer, and
then the community, for whatever
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 02:19:24PM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > You mean the bcm43xx wireless driver that's been upstream for months?
>
> Sorry, yes. For some reason I thought it was blocked on the dscape
> merge but obviously I was wrong. So a reverse-engineered driver got
> upstream WAY
Jeff Garzik wrote:
I guess Nvidia ADMA is pretty much
done now.
Yep. Without docs, even. And its supported by enterprise distros.
Well, the "docs" I was using was a half-finished, broken version of the
driver released by NVidia which had to be significantly revised, and the
public ADMA
> You were complaining about drivers that work on only one
> platform. Thus, I asked for list of said drivers, drivers that break
> Greg's pledge.
When did I ever say "one platform"? If I did, it was an error -- I've
tried to consistently talk about not every platform.
> I'm betting they
Roland Dreier wrote:
> Which of these actively maintained and supported drivers work on only
> one platform[1], and are excluded from enterprise distros? Can we
> truly count them as "many", as you repeatedly claim?
Why do we restrict this to actively maintained and supported drivers
(I
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 02:50:49PM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > Which of these actively maintained and supported drivers work on only
> > one platform[1], and are excluded from enterprise distros? Can we
> > truly count them as "many", as you repeatedly claim?
>
> Why do we restrict this
Roland Dreier wrote:
I thought you wrote tg3 without docs and without help from Broadcom?
We had docs and Broadcom's GPL'd driver.
To repeat, my point is that the drivers used most by users of
enterprise distros will get written with or without vendor docs or
help. Drivers for hardware
> On another side, some PATA drivers are incomplete or missing.
>
> When we switch to PATA and drop old ide stack, what will happen ?
> Will all driver be ported and full-feature, or some will be obsoleted ?
At the moment unless anyone gets upset I expect to obsolete the CMD640
but nothing else
> Which of these actively maintained and supported drivers work on only
> one platform[1], and are excluded from enterprise distros? Can we
> truly count them as "many", as you repeatedly claim?
Why do we restrict this to actively maintained and supported drivers
(I think abandonware drivers
Matthieu CASTET wrote:
Jeff Garzik garzik.org> writes:
And I seem to recall there's more SATA chipset documentation than Jeff
Garzik has time to implement support for.
I seriously doubt you can come up with even a single concrete example here.
Regardless, libata has 55+ drivers and
Trent Waddington wrote:
All this sounds like a lack of organisation on the side of the
community to me. Greg saying that he and others are twiddling their
thumbs because they don't know what hardware needs drivers says that
too. Where is the list of hardware-without-drivers? Until recently
Roland Dreier wrote:
I disagree -- Linux today gets drivers not just from volunteers
writing drivers from specs, but also from vendors writing drivers and
volunteers writing drivers via reverse engineering. And many of those
drivers don't work on every platform and aren't supported by
> > Like Jeff said, many of these are quite old.
>
> OK, but why isn't your army of volunteers fixing them?
One of the problems if lack of hardware. It's very hard to fix a
prehistoric serial driver if you don't have an ISA bus box with the
needed slot let alone the card.
And why bother - its
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 01:46:38PM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> I disagree -- Linux today gets drivers not just from volunteers
> writing drivers from specs, but also from vendors writing drivers and
> volunteers writing drivers via reverse engineering. And many of those
> drivers don't work on
On 1/31/07, Dave Airlie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm sort of with Roland on this, the timelines aren't usually worth it
for a company to bother especially with complicated hardware, the time
taken to do a community graphics driver for any GPU where specs have
been available approaches
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 05:12:31PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> You mean the bcm43xx wireless driver that's been upstream for months?
And seems to do 802.11b only and screw up the eeprom settings so that
the windows driver gets confused next time you boot windows. Lovely
driver. If the bios on
On 1/30/07, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 09:30:23PM +0400, Manu Abraham wrote:
>
> Sounds very nice indeed. Just happened to do a driver in a similar
> status, where the vendor did not want to make the specs and other
> stuff open, but was in a position to support
> You mean the bcm43xx wireless driver that's been upstream for months?
Sorry, yes. For some reason I thought it was blocked on the dscape
merge but obviously I was wrong. So a reverse-engineered driver got
upstream WAY FASTER than a driver where the vendor published specs and
GPLed source.
> > OK, fair enough, I forgot about tg3. But on the other hand, you
> > wrote
> > it without docs, actually _in spite of_ Broadcom, right?
> > Which I think makes my point that documentation is neither necessary
> > nor sufficient for a good Linux driver. Documentation helps, but if
> > no
> There was a wireless-mini-summit a week or so ago, so those developers
> all know what is going on in that space right now. They are facing a
> number of different regulatory issues, combined with lack of
> specifications from some vendors. I don't think that the developers who
>
Roland Dreier wrote:
Sure, Ralink drivers will get upstream eventually. But by the time
the drivers get merged, Ralink will have stopped making the chips that
it supports (or so I read, http://www.linuxemporium.co.uk/products/wireless/)!
I don't think that taking a year or two to merge a driver
Roland Dreier wrote:
> > Well, we can disagree about the majority of drivers. My feeling is
> > that most of the drivers that are really used by lots of people get
> > support beyond just a dump of docs -- in fact often vendors are
> > maintaining them, eg e1000, tg3, cciss, etc., to pick
> The Ralink wireless drivers are working to get their stuff upstream. I
> think there is only some wireless infrastructure needed to complete
> before it gets into mainline, but you will have to ask them about this.
>
> There was a wireless-mini-summit a week or so ago, so those developers
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 01:38:06PM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > > OK, but why isn't your army of volunteers fixing them?
> >
> > Because nobody has hardware for them?
>
> Greg said hardware wasn't necessary...
Someone has to have the hardware to test with. Hence my "debug by
email"
> > OK, but why isn't your army of volunteers fixing them?
>
> They don't know about them, or they don't have the hardware to test?
> Seriously, let the kernel-janitor's project know about any issues you
> have and they will be glad to jump on it. Those people are just
> chomping a the bit
> > Well, we can disagree about the majority of drivers. My feeling is
> > that most of the drivers that are really used by lots of people get
> > support beyond just a dump of docs -- in fact often vendors are
> > maintaining them, eg e1000, tg3, cciss, etc., to pick some running on
> > the
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 08:33:04 +0100, Bauke Jan Douma said:
> Greg KH wrote on 30-01-07 02:29:
> An offer they can't refuse.
>
> > This offer is in affect for all different types of devices, from USB
> > toys to PCI video devices to high-speed networking cards. If you build
> > it, we can get
On Jan 30 2007 21:23, Diego Calleja wrote:
>
>Sure, Linux doesn't support vax and the like, but it does support lots of
>architectures that matter. In http://netbsd.org/Ports/#ports-by-cpu
>there's a more Linux-like view of the architectures supported. Although
>Netbsd people will argue that
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 08:15:11PM +, Andrew Lyon wrote:
>
> How about a kernel driver for the m-cubed tbalancer bigNG ?
>
> http://www.t-balancer.com/english/bng.htm (see support section of site)
>
> Complete documentation is available, and devs are friendly (see
> forums), there is
El Tue, 30 Jan 2007 20:31:01 +0100 (MET), Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
escribió:
> Don't they claim 50+? Already browsing
> ftp://ftp.de.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/NetBSD-3.1 gives more than 2
> screenfuls [à 25].
I don't know exactly how many architectures does netbsd run, but Linux seems
On 1/30/07, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Free Linux Driver Development!
Yes, that's right, the Linux kernel community is offering all companies
free Linux driver development. No longer do you have to suffer through
all of the different examples in the Linux Device Driver Kit, o
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 08:52:12PM +0100, Diego Calleja wrote:
> El Tue, 30 Jan 2007 11:10:20 -0800, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribi?:
>
> > Any specific examples? I have a long list of people who wish to write
> > new drivers but just don't know which hardware is not yet supported.
>
>
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 02:33:01PM -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>
> Greg, did this go to the "announce" group as well? It should, some
> people read that even if they can't cope with LKML volume.
What "announce" group?
I noticed it hit /., so it is now being spread to a group wider than
lkml.
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 11:29:58AM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > > I'm all for openness of device programming specs, but I think it's a
> > > bit disingenous to suggest that all a company has to do to get a
> > > driver written and supported is throw some documentation over the
> > > wall.
El Tue, 30 Jan 2007 11:10:20 -0800, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> Any specific examples? I have a long list of people who wish to write
> new drivers but just don't know which hardware is not yet supported.
It'd be interesting to join forces with the BSD guys in this field, they
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 10:08:54PM +0300, Dmitri Vorobiev wrote:
> Greg KH ??:
> >Free Linux Driver Development!
>
> Just curious, it is a coincidence or a thoughtful action that this offer
> (which is undoubtedly very attractive and will definitely help the Linux
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 08:40:10PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Greg KH:
>
> >> This reminds of the the utterly broken dl2k network driver (which has
> >> got interrupt handling problems and doesn't properly synchronize with
> >> DMA transfers, IIRC). Hardware specs are available, and I
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 08:31:01PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> On Jan 30 2007 11:14, Greg KH wrote:
> >On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 11:52:48AM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >> >This driver will work with all[1] of the different
> >> >CPU types supported by Linux, the largest number of CPU types
Roland Dreier wrote:
Well, we can disagree about the majority of drivers. My feeling is
that most of the drivers that are really used by lots of people get
support beyond just a dump of docs -- in fact often vendors are
maintaining them, eg e1000, tg3, cciss, etc., to pick some running on
the
* Greg KH:
>> This reminds of the the utterly broken dl2k network driver (which has
>> got interrupt handling problems and doesn't properly synchronize with
>> DMA transfers, IIRC). Hardware specs are available, and I guess I
>> could even provide a hardware sample, maybe even two. (If the
>>
Roland Dreier wrote:
What are our standards for maintenance? How can we tell in advance if
something is going to be maintained (cf. drivers/net/chelsio)?
I don't think you can seriously argue that just posting documentation
is going to guarantee that a device is going to get a high-quality
Manu Abraham wrote:
On 1/30/07, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Free Linux Driver Development!
Yes, that's right, the Linux kernel community is offering all companies
free Linux driver development. No longer do you have to suffer through
all of the different examples in the Linux
> > I'm all for openness of device programming specs, but I think it's a
> > bit disingenous to suggest that all a company has to do to get a
> > driver written and supported is throw some documentation over the
> > wall. And it's crazy to suggest that the driver will work on every
> >
On Jan 30 2007 11:14, Greg KH wrote:
>On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 11:52:48AM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>> >This driver will work with all[1] of the different
>> >CPU types supported by Linux, the largest number of CPU types supported
>> >by any operating system ever before in the history of
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 08:33:04AM +0100, Bauke Jan Douma wrote:
> Greg KH wrote on 30-01-07 02:29:
> An offer they can't refuse.
>
> >This offer is in affect for all different types of devices, from USB
> >toys to PCI video devices to high-speed networking cards. If you build
> >it, we can get
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 02:45:57PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Greg KH:
>
> > Yes, that's right, the Linux kernel community is offering all companies
> > free Linux driver development. No longer do you have to suffer through
> > all of the different examples in the
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 11:52:48AM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >This driver will work with all[1] of the different
> >CPU types supported by Linux, the largest number of CPU types supported
> >by any operating system ever before in the history of computing.
>
> (How many do we support? How
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 09:45:50AM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > All that is needed is some kind of specification that describes how your
> > device works, or the email address of an engineer that is willing to
> > answer questions every once in a while. A few sample devices might be
> >
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 09:30:23PM +0400, Manu Abraham wrote:
>
> Sounds very nice indeed. Just happened to do a driver in a similar
> status, where the vendor did not want to make the specs and other
> stuff open, but was in a position to support an OSS driver for the
> STB0899 demodulator
> The vast majority of these were submitted ages ago. Standards for
> acceptance and maintenance have risen since the days of ISA drivers
> and floppy tape drives.
What are our standards for maintenance? How can we tell in advance if
something is going to be maintained (cf.
Jeff Garzik wrote:
Great offer to folks for drivers, but it sends a mixed message. OSDL
should offer to host a page somewhere to coordinate all of this.
:-)
Jeff
Roland Dreier wrote:
Just look at the in-tree drivers: there are tons of them that don't
work on big-endian platforms, or
Roland Dreier wrote:
Just look at the in-tree drivers: there are tons of them that don't
work on big-endian platforms, or have 64-bit problems, or have no SMP
support. And that doesn't even count drivers that are so bitrotted
they won't even build any more.
The vast majority of these were
On 1/30/07, Roland Dreier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All that is needed is some kind of specification that describes how your
> device works, or the email address of an engineer that is willing to
> answer questions every once in a while. A few sample devices might be
> good to have so
> All that is needed is some kind of specification that describes how your
> device works, or the email address of an engineer that is willing to
> answer questions every once in a while. A few sample devices might be
> good to have so that debugging doesn't have to be done by email, but if
On 1/30/07, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Free Linux Driver Development!
Yes, that's right, the Linux kernel community is offering all companies
free Linux driver development. No longer do you have to suffer through
all of the different examples in the Linux Device Driver Kit, o
* Greg KH:
> Yes, that's right, the Linux kernel community is offering all companies
> free Linux driver development. No longer do you have to suffer through
> all of the different examples in the Linux Device Driver Kit, or pick
> through the thousands of example drivers in the
>Subject: Free Linux Driver Development!
>
>Free Linux Driver Development!
>
>Yes, that's right, the Linux kernel community is offering all companies
>free Linux driver development. No longer do you have to suffer through
>all of the different examples in the Linux Devic
Subject: Free Linux Driver Development!
Free Linux Driver Development!
Yes, that's right, the Linux kernel community is offering all companies
free Linux driver development. No longer do you have to suffer through
all of the different examples in the Linux Device Driver Kit, or pick
through
201 - 300 of 376 matches
Mail list logo
