Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 11:09:05AM +0100, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: >> Setup the buffer access functions in the buffer allocate function. >There is no >> need to let each driver handle this on its own. > >That's nicer. > >So, you have different ways to have "buffers" and the driver doesn't >know what type you have, and it's chosen at build time? Why are you >making the kernel builder make such a decision? Why not just pick one, >that you know works well, and use it? > >You would get rid of a whole level of indirection that I really don't >think you need at all, right? Because there is not currently a buffer that suits all use cases. One might be possible but would involve autoswitching between different approaches a hence have this indirection anyway, be it burried. Also note that some of the buffers are hardware. Plus the pseudo buffer used for in kernel push interfaces is different again. That code has only reached RFC state so far. >Make a decision, don't force someone else to make it for you... Defaults are sensible. Preventing other peoples use cases are not. > >greg k-h -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
