From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261363AbVFKPou (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Jun 2005 11:44:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261422AbVFKPot (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Jun 2005 11:44:49 -0400 Received: from soundwarez.org ([217.160.171.123]:36558 "EHLO soundwarez.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261363AbVFKPoZ (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Jun 2005 11:44:25 -0400 Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2005 17:44:21 +0200 From: Kay Sievers To: Adrian Bunk Cc: Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Patch series to remove devfs [00/22] Message-ID: <20050611154421.GA20373@vrfy.org> References: <20050611074327.GA27785@kroah.com> <20050611102133.GA3770@stusta.de> <20050611143904.GA30612@suse.de> <20050611153656.GB3770@stusta.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050611153656.GB3770@stusta.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 05:36:56PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 07:39:04AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 12:21:34PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 12:43:27AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > >... > > > > Comments welcome. > > > >... > > > > > > Please don't remove the !CONFIG_DEVFS_FS dummies from devfs_fs_kernel.h. > > > > > > I'm sure some driver maintainers will want to keep the functions in > > > their code because they share their drivers between 2.4 and 2.6 . > > > > All drivers should be in the mainline kernel tree, so why would they > > need this? Remember, out-of-the-tree drivers are on their own... > > I'm talking about drivers in the mainline kernel tree. > > In some cases the driver author supports both 2.4 and 2.6 and prefers to > support them in one file. Sometimes he submits the latest version of his > driver to Marcelo or Linus. > > If you remove the global function dummies, you force every driver > maintainer who works this way to add the function dummies to their > drivers. > > Yes, there are many places where 2.4 and 2.6 are not source compatible > for good reasons. But if the effort for maintaining compatibility > between 2.4 and 2.6 in one area is as easy as keeping a header file with > some dummy funtions it's worth considering. > > And keeping the compatibility stuff in one file instead of spreaded > through the kernel sources makes the cleanup to remove the last > occurences a few years from now easier. How do these 2.4+2.6 drivers integrate with sysfs? Without proper 2.6-driver-core integration they will not work anyway. Kay