[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1163619541.19111.6.camel@dv>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 14:39:01 -0500
From: Pavel Roskin <proski@....org>
To: "John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>
Cc: Michael Buesch <mb@...sch.de>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, madwifi-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
lwn@....net
Subject: Re: [Madwifi-devel] ANNOUNCE: SFLC helps developers assess ar5k
(enabling free Atheros HAL)
Hello!
On Wed, 2006-11-15 at 14:21 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 07:42:14PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
>
> > Now that it seems to be ok to use these openbsd sources, should I port
> > them to my driver framework?
> > I looked over the ar5k code and, well, I don't like it. ;)
> > I don't really like having a HAL. I'd rather prefer a "real" driver
> > without that HAL obfuscation.
>
> I don't think anyone likes the HAL-based architecture. I don't think
> we will accept a HAL-based driver into the upstream kernel.
I said it before, and it's worth repeating. Dissolving HAL in the
sources is easy. It's just a matter of moving functions around without
serious chances of breaking anything as long as the source compiles.
The whole "HAL-based architecture" can be reshuffled and eliminated by
one person in a few days.
Making things work properly takes years. That's what MadWifi has been
working on for a long time, using contributions and bug reports from
scores of users and developers.
Rejecting MadWifi because it's HAL based is like throwing away a diamond
ring because it's too narrow.
--
Regards,
Pavel Roskin
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists