Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Since your driver is not merged, there's no real benefit in my sending > me patches against it. And it's not merged because you stated that you have produced a rewritten driver, using my driver just as a reference, and I was naive enough to believe it and let it go. > Since I just submitted a v2 driver that seems to be ready to be > merged, how about I just add DMA s-g support so you get all the > functionality you need? > > This option sounds much easier than you going through all the pain of > cleaning up your driver. Do I really have to answer such questions? One can't simply take someone's code, replace the MODULE_AUTHOR, twist a bit to suit his needs, and send it as his own. In my country, it wouldn't be even legal. I have at least one similar situation here. I'm using frame grabber drivers for an I.MX6 processor on-chip feature. The problem is, the author hasn't yet managed (for years now) to have this functionality merged into the official tree. Obviously, I'm putting some considerable work in it. Does this mean I'm free to grab it as my own and request that it is to be merged instead? No, I have to wait until the original work is merged, and only then I can ask for my patches to be applied (in the form of changes, not a raw driver code). -- Krzysztof Halasa Industrial Research Institute for Automation and Measurements PIAP Al. Jerozolimskie 202, 02-486 Warsaw, Poland -- 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
