From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from bar.sig21.net ([80.81.252.164]:50305 "EHLO bar.sig21.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758714AbZHRLAq (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Aug 2009 07:00:46 -0400 Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 13:00:41 +0200 From: Johannes Stezenbach To: Michael Krufky Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-dvb@linuxtv.org Subject: Re: [linux-dvb] au0828: experimental support for Syntek Teledongle [05e1:0400] Message-ID: <20090818110041.GA14710@linuxtv.org> References: <37219a840908171359m152363a2ub377abe6e27ff237@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <37219a840908171359m152363a2ub377abe6e27ff237@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 04:59:42PM -0400, Michael Krufky wrote: > > variations, nobody has ever verified that the GPIO programming is safe > to use, and there is no way to prevent the potentially harmful code > from running on the wrong device. > > I, personally, do not want the responsibility of explaining to users > that their usb sticks may be damaged because of code that got merged I would be interested to know if someone _actually_ managed to break their hardware by using buggy drivers. IANAL but I think that consumer electronics hardware which can be damaged by software is broken by design. A vendor selling such hardware is stupid because people would return the broken hardware and get a replacement. I don't see how a vendor could proof that the device was not damaged by an obscure bug in the Windows driver to get around their responsibility to replace broken hardware within the warranty period. Johannes