On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 11:30:00PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jan 2014, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 12:45:05AM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > > > Peter handed it on. Try using git log on Documentation/devices.txt. It > > > still gets updates. > > > > > > Perhaps you'd care to stick to reality and fix the tree instead of trying > > > to excuse the mess ? > > > > Perhaps returning to reality might be advantageous rather than trying > > to repeat statements which can't have any bearing on this - especially > > as the git history which you're referring to only goes back to 2.6.12-rc2, > > and this predates 2.6.12-rc2 by a long shot. > > > > > More importantly certain folks need to stop abusing static numbers > > > allocated properly. Repeating it having made a total hash of it before > > > is dismal. > > > > And if you continue these stupid accusations which have no basis at all, > > we're going to get into a real big argument, because you are soo _wrong_ > > on that point. I was always the one arguing /against/ the re-use of > > existing major/minor numbers. I was the one arguing /against/ Nicolas' > > patches to make every serial port appear in the 4,64 ttyS namespace. > > If you remember correctly, that was my attempt at making serial port > minor assignment to be dynamic... just like everything else is today. > And it seemed to me that you thought this was a good idea. I may have thought that a dynamic space for serial devices was a good idea, but what I was referring to above was specifically the implementation. Unfortunately, there's precious little public evidence of this as the patches were never posted to a public mailing list. However, what there is (as part of another thread) shows that I held that view: http://archive.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20041124.164950.92dc25d7.en.html Plus, of course, the comments in the patch system where I picked out a number of further technical issues, such as changing inode->i_rdev, userspace locking, etc. If you want to review them, they're 1427/1 - 1434/1, 1435/2, 1436/2. Unfortunately the authorship of those comments was lost. Hence, my recollection is correct here. -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: 5.8Mbps down 500kbps up. Estimation in database were 13.1 to 19Mbit for a good line, about 7.5+ for a bad. Estimate before purchase was "up to 13.2Mbit". -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |