Hi Devin, On Wednesday 18 November 2009 10:36:45 Devin Heitmueller wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 4:13 AM, Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I agree that it would help to split this patch up. Some cases are > > trivial, so they can be put together in one patch. When things get more > > complex it makes sense to put it in a separate patch for easier reviewing > > by the relevant maintainers. > > > > This is a very nice cleanup and improves the driver code significantly. > > Especially since so many drivers keep copying the same useless code time > > and again :-( > > > > Reducing driver code complexity is a very important goal since that is > > the weakest point of many of the existing drivers. But it should be done > > carefully of course and in such a manner that people can review it > > easily. > > Hello Hans, > > Thanks for the comments. > > Review is good. Review *and* actually trying the code is better. If > it comes down to Laurent's time being the constraint, I would rather > see him spending the time setting up a tree with all his proposed > patches and doing a call for testers than cutting up patches so that > maintainers can review and guess whether it's not going to cause > problems in their particular driver (and I say "guess" here because in > some cases it may fail in non-obvious ways that wouldn't be noticed > without actually trying it). Time is always a constraint, but in this case the problem is that I don't have the necessary hardware to test all the changes. Your wish turned into reality (I can't promise that for all wishes though ;-)): http://linuxtv.org/hg/~pinchartl/v4l-dvb-cleanup -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
