From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267454AbUH0Uht (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Aug 2004 16:37:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267549AbUH0Ud5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Aug 2004 16:33:57 -0400 Received: from mail.kroah.org ([69.55.234.183]:55483 "EHLO perch.kroah.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267621AbUH0UcO (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Aug 2004 16:32:14 -0400 Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:31:07 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Alan Stern Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] Summarizing the PWC driver questions/answers Message-ID: <20040827203106.GA3546@kroah.com> References: <20040827162613.GB32244@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 02:51:01PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Greg KH wrote: > > > Q: Why did you remove the hook from the pwc driver? > > A: It was there for the explicit purpose to support a binary only > > module. That goes against the kernel's documented procedures, so I > > had to take it out. > > Can you say exactly where these procedures/policies are spelled out? See Linus's response on this thread for a statement of such a policy. As to where they are written down, I don't know, sorry. greg k-h