From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Dharm Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 18:54:53 +0000 Subject: Re: Matching semantics for version numbers.... MIME-Version: 1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="zhXaljGHf11kAtnf" Message-Id: List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: To: linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org --zhXaljGHf11kAtnf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 10:12:09PM -0800, David Brownell wrote: > Hi Matt, >=20 > Two comments come to mind: >=20 > (1) Is it correct that changing this would involve no more than: >=20 > * Linux 2.4.? kernel updates: > - drivers/usb/usb.c ... usb_match_id() > - drivers/usb/ibmcam.c ... uses range matching I'm not certain if this range-matching is done correctly for < > or if it thinks <=3D and >=3D, but assuming it's "working" now, yes, it would need changing. > - drivers/usb/storage/unusual_devs.h ... lots of ranges This wouldn't need updating -- it's actually improperly coded right now with the assumption of <=3D and >=3D (which was how my custom matching code worked). > * Hotplug scripts > * "usbmodules" I'm not sure what you mean by this item. > * No spec/documentation (yet) Other than my comments above, yes, that should be all the changes. > Distributions would need to get all those updates at once; > I don't know how much of a problem that'd be, except > that if there's no coordination then it'll be painful. If it > happens, this should all be ready at the same time. (Not > like the original match_flags patch ... though goofing this > up would break less, since "modutils" will still work.) AFAICT, yes. Having one part of the patch (assuming the 2 kernel files count as one "part") doesn't break anything. > (2) For some reason my preference in this area would > be to use "low <=3D value < high" range specs rather the > current "low < value < high" or "low <=3D value <=3D high". >=20 > That's just a better match to how I normally think about > such ranges -- not a huge deal, but it seems like Jeff > Ozvold had a similar thought. So maybe I'm not alone > in thinking about those bcd version codes that way. Someone mentioned this to me in a private e-mail... it seems reasonable, as then range checks can be 0.00 -- 3.00, and 3.00 -- 9.99 with no overlap. Tho, it _must_ be well documented that the low and high parameters are matched slightly differently. Matt --=20 Matthew Dharm Home: mdharm-usb@one-eyed-alien.= net=20 Maintainer, Linux USB Mass Storage Driver Ye gods! I have feet??! -- Dust Puppy User Friendly, 12/4/1997 --zhXaljGHf11kAtnf Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE6uPj9z64nssGU+ykRAhF1AJ9/6qTdtZ5GYqa9BhwMqzi9vuSEEgCfcZjA qWzFvoC1JoSxYePEjreDlUQ= =shdy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --zhXaljGHf11kAtnf-- _______________________________________________ Linux-hotplug-devel mailing list http://linux-hotplug.sourceforge.net Linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-hotplug-devel