From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-fx0-f218.google.com ([209.85.220.218]:59224 "EHLO mail-fx0-f218.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751945AbZJQPUG (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:20:06 -0400 From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz To: Johannes Berg Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rt2x00: Implement support for rt2800pci Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:19:23 +0200 Cc: Ivo van Doorn , John Linville , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, users@rt2x00.serialmonkey.com, Alban Browaeys , Benoit PAPILLAULT , Felix Fietkau , Luis Correia , Mattias Nissler , Mark Asselstine , Xose Vazquez Perez , "linux-kernel" References: <200910152137.58164.IvDoorn@gmail.com> <200910171654.03344.bzolnier@gmail.com> <1255792104.3434.2.camel@johannes.local> In-Reply-To: <1255792104.3434.2.camel@johannes.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <200910171719.24093.bzolnier@gmail.com> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Saturday 17 October 2009 17:08:24 Johannes Berg wrote: > On Sat, 2009-10-17 at 16:54 +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > > I also used the opportunity to take a closer look at this driver and > > it seems that it needlessly adds around 2 KLOC to kernel by duplicating > > the common content of rt2800usb.h to rt2800pci.h instead of moving it > > to the shared header (like it is done in the staging crap drivers): > > Tell me you're kidding -- comparing 2k duplicated LOC with a driver that > ships its own wifi stack? Why would I be? 1) The patch is submitted to kernel _proper_ not kernel staging so I see no excuse for duplicating 2-4 KLOC and it should be fixed. 2) The fact that the some staging driver consists in 90% of crap doesn't mean that it doesn't have some good design ideas.. (i.e. abstracting chipset registers access in a discussed case) From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752408AbZJQPUI (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:20:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752103AbZJQPUH (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:20:07 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f218.google.com ([209.85.220.218]:59224 "EHLO mail-fx0-f218.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751945AbZJQPUG (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:20:06 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:message-id:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=RzeExyRVGf9PyHcmZ3BOT0x4rqaKAAfXDAyZoBEddROf1jXw+K3g2S0DgBtOakTVA/ STR3zKxe+lQZXnWO9Wk4hnCGPy/z7yS3skOT6AkurmD2WtpTtL4CDyBTGB5fz0QEOGJ5 u78gf8W2bfqrgfathzc/uU0C7k8huSty+7nro= From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz To: Johannes Berg Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rt2x00: Implement support for rt2800pci Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:19:23 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.1 (Linux/2.6.31.1-56.fc12.x86_64; KDE/4.3.1; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Ivo van Doorn , John Linville , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, users@host1.serialmonkey.com, Alban Browaeys , Benoit PAPILLAULT , Felix Fietkau , Luis Correia , Mattias Nissler , Mark Asselstine , Xose Vazquez Perez , "linux-kernel" References: <200910152137.58164.IvDoorn@gmail.com> <200910171654.03344.bzolnier@gmail.com> <1255792104.3434.2.camel@johannes.local> In-Reply-To: <1255792104.3434.2.camel@johannes.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <200910171719.24093.bzolnier@gmail.com> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Saturday 17 October 2009 17:08:24 Johannes Berg wrote: > On Sat, 2009-10-17 at 16:54 +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > > I also used the opportunity to take a closer look at this driver and > > it seems that it needlessly adds around 2 KLOC to kernel by duplicating > > the common content of rt2800usb.h to rt2800pci.h instead of moving it > > to the shared header (like it is done in the staging crap drivers): > > Tell me you're kidding -- comparing 2k duplicated LOC with a driver that > ships its own wifi stack? Why would I be? 1) The patch is submitted to kernel _proper_ not kernel staging so I see no excuse for duplicating 2-4 KLOC and it should be fixed. 2) The fact that the some staging driver consists in 90% of crap doesn't mean that it doesn't have some good design ideas.. (i.e. abstracting chipset registers access in a discussed case)