Hi! > > Let's restart this discussion and focus on the main roadblock (others > > are minor details which can be sorted out later). > > > > If it feels like a hack, the key issue seems to me to be the choice of > > the API to present the GPS data to user space. Right? > > Or even more fundamentally, does this belong in the kernel at all? Yes, it does. > Given that we'd still depend on gpsd and other, proprietary, daemons to > actually parse and use (also for control) the plethora of GPS protocols > available, it may even be best to just keep it all in user space. No. We'd want to move away from gpsd in the long term. (/dev/input/mice was in similar situation.) > Now, if we'd ever have a proper GPS framework that handled everything in > kernel space (i.e. no more gpsd) then we would be able to write kernel > drivers that also take care of PM. But perhaps that's unlikely to ever > be realised given the state of things (proprietary protocols, numerous > quirky implementations, etc). That is what needs to happen. > The kernel is probably not the place to be working around issues like > that, even if serdev at least allows for such hacks to be fairly > isolated in drivers (unlike some of the earlier proposals touching core > code). Oh, kernel is indeed right place to provide hardware abstraction -- and that includes bug workarounds. We'd like unmodified userspace to run on any supported hardware, remember? Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
