On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 11:50:48AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote: > On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 10:03 -0800, Matthew Dharm wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 11:29:27AM +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > > Am Dienstag, 15. Dezember 2009 19:03:00 schrieb Matthew Dharm: > > > > > This would break existing systems and thus introduce a regression. > > > > > We'd need to go through a feature removal process. For the time being > > > > > I see no alternative to Seife's patch, as we cannot introduce ejection > > > > > code to another wireless driver and need to support these devices. > > > > > > > > The right answer here is neither to move the eject code nor to introduce > > > > more of it. New devices should be supported via userspace. > > > > > > Usually I would agree, but in this case the vendor reused IDs. > > > The legacy kernel space switcher and user space would race. > > > > So, let me see if I understand this... we have two devices that use the > > same IDs, and get mode-switched the same way, but need different > > post-switch drivers? > > > > If this is the case, then the only reasonable answer to is to push the > > modeswitch code for both into udev and out of the kernel. It will take > > you mean usb_modeswitch, not udev actually. That is correct; I had mis-typed. Tho, the actual implementation is udev calling usb_modeswitch and/or eject. Matt -- Matthew Dharm Home: mdharm-usb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Maintainer, Linux USB Mass Storage Driver What, are you one of those Microsoft-bashing Linux freaks? -- Customer to Greg User Friendly, 2/10/1999
Attachment:
pgpVQWq3chuBo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
