On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 20:01:11 -0400 (EDT) David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Rob Gardner <robmatic@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 17:18:12 -0600 > > > Bjørn says it could have a minor performance impact, but should not > > cause any loss of functionality. I don't think there's any hard data on > > what the performance cost might be but I know he would eventually like > > to get rid of the exception list and live with the possible performance > > impact if it means functionality for more devices. > > Therefore I would recommend turning the workaround on by default and > have a white list. The exception list means "usb_device_id entries for specific devices that are known to need the workaround." There are just two such entries. There isn't even a separate list. So maybe we just have a nomenclature problem, and we could simply be calling this a "white list" instead of "exception list". The other possible meaning of whitelist (all devices that *don't* need the workaround) is unthinkable, as that would be a huge list and much more prone to be unmanageable than what we've got now. -- Rob Gardner <robmatic@xxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
