From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965044AbaH0VLN (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Aug 2014 17:11:13 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:57096 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933809AbaH0VLK (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Aug 2014 17:11:10 -0400 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 14:11:09 -0700 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Ricardo Ribalda Delgado Cc: Felipe Balbi , Linux USB Mailing List , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: gadget: net2280: Remove pci_class from PCI_TABLE Message-ID: <20140827211109.GA26897@kroah.com> References: <1409144429-23723-1-git-send-email-ricardo.ribalda@gmail.com> <20140827192547.GB9620@kroah.com> <20140827202204.GA13047@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 11:03:00PM +0200, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote: > Hello Greg > > >> > >> Not many drivers define the pci interface and there is no other driver > >> that has the same vendor and product id. Therefore I see no hurt in > >> adding both patches, one to make the driver broader, and another to > >> fix pci-sysfs. > >> > >> Also, the change on pci-sysfs might affect more stuff and therefore > >> take longer to be applied. > > > > As we have been printing the value to userspace in this way for well > > over a decade now, and nothing has changed, I say it's a userspace bug > > that you should fix instead. Don't work around broken user programs in > > the kernel by changing something that has been stable for 10+ years. > > > > Ok, sorry, not 10+ years, the commit was written May of 2005, so 9 > > years. > > > > Fix your module loading code please. > > On the other thread ( https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/27/242 ) we have > agreed about fixing this thing on pci-sysfs.c . > > Still I think that there is no good reason to add the pci interface to > the pci_table on this driver. Therefore I consider that this patch is > still valid. > > What do you think. This patch is NACK? Yeah, I don't think this patch is needed as it properly sets the class of the device to be matched against, so it should not be necessary at all. thanks, greg k-h