[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070402074210.GA25320@kroah.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2007 00:42:10 -0700
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Li Yu <raise.sail@...il.com>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@...ightbb.com>, yanghong@...ss.com.cn,
linux-usb-devel <linux-usb-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
hongzhiyi@...ss.com.cn, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] [RFC] HID bus design overview.
On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 03:07:29PM +0800, Li Yu wrote:
> Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> >
> > No, please don't do that. As soon as there is a special driver written
> > for a device that device's VID/PID should be added to generic HID
> > blacklist. This way udev will load the proper driver right away and
> > there will not be any flip-flopping of input devices.
> >
> Hi, I do not think that using blacklist in base driver for this purpose
> is good idea. If so, we need modify source when each new HID device
> driver come, that's so ugly. I think the blacklist only should be used
> for those really broken/buggy hardware, not for these normal hardware
> with extended feature.
>
> Er, I also want to know what are drawbacks of "flip-flopping" ?
You have to create some kind of userspace program to disconnect the
device from the hid driver, and bind it to the new driver, for every new
device/driver that comes along.
Yes, you can do this, but the blacklist is simpler and easier.
thanks,
greg k-h
-
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