From: "Németh Márton" <nm127@freemail.hu>
To: Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@free.fr>
Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
V4L Mailing List <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Kaiser <thomas@kaiser-linux.li>,
Theodore Kilgore <kilgota@auburn.edu>,
Kyle Guinn <elyk03@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/21] gspca pac7302/pac7311: separate the two drivers
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2009 22:59:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AEE04AA.1040308@freemail.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091101095259.67122ef1@tele>
Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 00:13:10 +0100
> Németh Márton <nm127@freemail.hu> wrote:
>
>> the following patchset refactores the Pixart PAC7311 subdriver. The
>> current situation is that the code contains a lot of decisions
>> like this:
>>
>> if (sd->sensor == SENSOR_PAC7302) {
>> ... do this ...
>> } else {
>> ... do something else ...
>> }
>>
>> The sensor type is determined using the USB Vendor ID and Product
>> ID which means that the decisions shown are not really necessary.
>>
>> The goal of the patchset is to have a PAC7302 and a PAC7311 subdriver
>> which have the benefit that there is no decision necessary on sensor
>> type at runtime. The common functions can be extracted later but this
>> would be a different patchset.
>
> Splitting the pac7311 subdriver is a good idea, but I don't like your
> patchset: a lot of changes (function prefixes) are nullified by the
> last patch. I'd better like only one change for the pac7302 creation
> and a second one for the interface change of pac_find_sof() in
> pac_common.h (BTW, this file could now be compiled separately).
Hello Jef,
thank you for the feedback, I'll try to send a patch set wich contains
bigger steps. I hope the separation will be not a too big step and won't
make it too difficult to bisect any possible problem I might introduce
with this change. But hope for the best and imagine the easy way when
no regression was introduced.
I am also thinking about finding the common functions which can be
compiled separately either in a helper module or to gspca_main maybe.
But first I focus on the pac7302/pac7311 separation.
Márton Németh
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-01 21:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-31 23:13 [PATCH 00/21] gspca pac7302/pac7311: separate the two drivers Németh Márton
2009-11-01 8:52 ` Jean-Francois Moine
2009-11-01 21:59 ` Németh Márton [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4AEE04AA.1040308@freemail.hu \
--to=nm127@freemail.hu \
--cc=elyk03@gmail.com \
--cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
--cc=kilgota@auburn.edu \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=moinejf@free.fr \
--cc=thomas@kaiser-linux.li \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox