On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 09:35:12AM +0100, Pierre Ossman wrote: > On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 20:19:28 -0800 > Greg KH <greg at kroah.com> wrote: > > > > > One funny thing, a number of companies have contacted us already, asking > > for Linux support for their devices, only for us to tell them that all > > of their devices are already supported just fine, no new work is > > needed. They were pleasantly supprised :) > > > > I think such comments should be made with caution. In most cases where > the vendor hasn't been involved, there has been some level of reverse > engineering involved. So the driver can be based on flawed > assumptions. Also, there's the issue of erratas. In short, just > because we have a driver doesn't mean we don't want vendors to get > involved. Oh, I agree, just that for the specific examples I was referring to, we had support for the devices because of the lower-level chip they had in their devices was already supported by Linux, and we had already added their deviece ids, or, their device was a usb-class type device, and our class drivers supported things just fine, no changes needed. thanks, greg k-h
