Manu Abraham wrote: > On 8/4/07, Janne Grunau <janne-dvb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Saturday 04 August 2007 00:02:29 Manu Abraham wrote: >>> Do we really want to have adapter numbers in DVB bridge drivers ? >>> IMHO, it doesn't look pleasing to have that. >> I think it's worthwhile to have it. >>> Is there any other possible better alternatives ? >> Something similiar is possible with udev rules but I wouldn't say that >> it is a better alternative. > > Why ? If you can achieve the same without any code change, doesn't > that look better ? using a module option to specify adapter number is a _much_ more user friendly solution, as opposed to udev rules. >>> If it is that >>> absolute a necessity, can we hide the ugliness in dvb-core at least ? >> I'm not really sure what you mean exactly. If you want to avoid changes >> in the bridge drivers I don't see a way to archieve that. If you want >> the changes as small as possible look at the final patch. > > That one looks better than your first patch. (Although i hate having a > MAX limit defined) The MAX limit was already there beforehand -- Janne only moved the setting of it from dvbdev.c to dvbdev.h. > I meant adding a module parameter to each module, which was a bit, .. > I don't know how come others said that they liked the first one very > much. I liked the concept... of course the macro is much cleaner looking. >> One line for >> the module parameter and the added parameter for the register function. >> I don't think it can be done with less changes. > > > True. -MiKE _______________________________________________ linux-dvb mailing list linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
