On Thu, 2014-10-16 at 10:48 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 01:03:49PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Wed, 2014-10-15 at 22:53 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 09:11:36AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2014-10-15 at 06:03 -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote: > > > > [] > > > > > I thought I remember Greg saying something about getting rid of this > > > > > driver anyway, but I could be wrong. If Greg decides to keep this > > > > > driver around, then I think we should something like your suggestion > > > > > above. > > > > > > > > Or maybe just make the Kconfig depend on X86_32 > > > > > > What I like about your patches is that they are pure theoretical work > > > and I don't have to think about them like regular proper patches with a > > > signed off by etc. All the fun, none of the responsibility. > > > > I've sent a lot of signed-off patches. > > These are simple suggestions. > > > > I think COMPILE_TEST isn't useful here. > > I don't understand... COMPILE_TEST means runing a static checker on > the driver. Why would we not want to do QA? I think we can drop this patch altogether since I have submitted another patch to remove this driver from the kernel completely, since Matthias Beyer (and Greg KH in earlier discussions) suggested we do so.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
