Re: [RFC/PATCH] sysfs'ify video4linux

[Gerd Knorr <kraxel@bytesex.org>]

> Hm, it just looks like you quoted my message and didn't write anything
> new.  Did something not go through correctly?

:-/  ... I should learn to use my mailer correctly ...
Should have been that one:

==============================[ cut here ]==============================
To: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] sysfs'ify video4linux
In-Reply-To: <20030717214907.GA3255@kroah.com>

> > Version (1) can be done without breaking the build, with a hack along 
> > the lines "if (no release callback) printk(KERN_WARN please fix your
> > driver)", so the drivers can be fixed step-by-step afterwards.
> 
> That sounds like a nice way to start.

> I don't think it will be that bad for them.  Just have them change the
> v4l device from being a structure included in their structure, into a
> pointer, and then create it before registering, and free it in the
> release() callback.

Good point.  So the mandatory ->release() callback version is also the
more flexible one.  I like that :)

> Breaking the build is a very good thing to do at times, to ensure that
> stuff gets fixed properly.  Users might go for a while without realizing
> that there really is a problem in their driver.
> 
> But in the end, it's up to you...

Breaking the build _right now_ with 2.6 becoming stable is IMHO not a
good idea, I think I better try to avoid that until 2.7.

New patch will come later today or early next week.

  Gerd

-- 
sigfault