From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 13:26:36 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] rtl8188eu: new package In-Reply-To: <55AF6DB2.4090301@lucaceresoli.net> References: <1436188175-7912-1-git-send-email-luca@lucaceresoli.net> <1436188175-7912-2-git-send-email-luca@lucaceresoli.net> <20150718233012.5293b49f@free-electrons.com> <55AE72C8.10405@lucaceresoli.net> <20150721225724.401300ef@free-electrons.com> <55AF6DB2.4090301@lucaceresoli.net> Message-ID: <20150722132636.6fe86008@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Luca, On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 12:17:22 +0200, Luca Ceresoli wrote: > >> It's on my todo list. > > BTW, I think the rtl8188eu can go on its own way, without waiting for > the discussion about /dev management, right? Absolutely, I'll be happy to take rtl8818eu independently from the discussion on /dev management and firmware loading. > > I think it's OK to support this case. People using kernels older than > > 2.6.32 are stuck with static /dev and may have to load firmwares. > > Another use case is to have dynamic /dev management on kernels > <2.6.32, even without any firmware loading need. mdev is reportedly > working without devtmpfs. I haven't tested it seriously, but it might > be very interesting for the poor souls. Correct. So far I believe Peter's position was that people still using kernel older than 2.6.32 should simply use static, but maybe that was a too restrictive decision. > > Do you have some proposals? > > Idea 1: > - just add a new entry to "/dev management": > ( ) Static using device table > ( ) Static using device table + mdev <- New option > (X) Dynamic using devtmpfs only > ( ) Dynamic using {devtmpfs +} mdev {} = new wording only > ( ) Dynamic using {devtmpfs +} eudev {} = new wording only > > Idea 2: > - Add a new bool named "Use devtmpfs" > - y (default) -> enable devtmpfs in the kernel config > - n -> use the static device table > - Change "/dev management" to "dynamic /dev management": > ( ) none > (X) mdev > ( ) eudev I think I prefer idea (1) here. It's closer to what we already have, and as you say, it's probably clearer for the user / easier to document. Our manual has a complete section about /dev management at http://buildroot.org/downloads/manual/manual.html#_dev_management, so this will have to be updated. Thanks! Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com