linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] lirc: remove backwards compatibility macro obfuscation (Was: Free Linux Driver Development!)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 2 Feb 2007 12:04:47 +0100
From:	"Vincent Vanackere" <vincent.vanackere@...il.com>
To:	"Pekka J Enberg" <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Cc:	lirc@...telmus.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-input@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lirc: remove backwards compatibility macro obfuscation (Was: Free Linux Driver Development!)

On 2/2/07, Pekka J Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi> wrote:
> From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
>  [...]
>  drivers/lirc_atiusb/lirc_atiusb.c           |  102 -----------------
                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 I may be mistaken, but the lirc_atiusb module looks redondant with
the driver already in drivers/usb/input/ati_remote.c.
Moreover, I was under the impression that the input layer was
currently considered the "right way" to implement the kernel side lirc
needs (AFAICT the lircd daemon is already able to handle events from
the input layer).

So I'm wondering : in view of a kernel merge, wouldn't it be better
for the lirc drivers to be ported to the input layer (linux-input ML
in cc:) ?

Regards,

Vincent
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/