[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080725235936.aeae8bc2.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 23:59:36 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "D. Kelly" <user.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: "mailing list: linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>, i2c@...sensors.org
Subject: Re: Problem with restricted I2C algorithms in kernel 2.6.26!
(cc's added)
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:33:57 -0700 "D. Kelly" <user.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=3845de25c5f83cd52729570f7b501679d37ca8de
>
> The patch at the preceeding url disables the users ability to select
> I2C algorithms. Specifically the reason stated was:
>
> "The algorithm drivers are
> helper drivers that are selected automatically
> as needed. There's no point in listing them in the config menu, it can
> only confuse users and waste their time."
>
> The algorithm drivers will not be 'selected automatically as needed'
> if the user is compiling something outside of the kernel that requires
> them! Just one example, there are drivers found in the V4L dvb driver
> tree that require i2c bit-banging be enabled. The drivers are now
> broken because the user is not allowed to enable bit-banging himself.
> The only way around this is to revert the patch manually or enable
> something else in the kernel, that he doesn't need, just to get
> bit-banging.
>
> It's a very bad idea to assume that nothing built outside of the
> kernel may need i2c algorithms. Furthermore, the whole point of being
> able to customize your kernel is so you can select only the things
> which you need. It makes no good sense to intentionally
> disable/restrict the users ability to do so. Additionally, assuming
> the ability to select i2c algorithms will only confuse the user and
> waste their time is ridiculous. The user should be allowed to decide
> for himself what he needs regarding this!
>
> One of the biggest reasons people choose to compile things from
> cvs/svn/mercurial/etc. is because it gives them access to newer bug
> fixes and support for things not yet present in the kernel source. A
> perfect example, the multiproto dvb driver tree. Users wanting
> support for dvb-s2 devices have to compile drivers outside of the
> kernel because it's simply not available in the kernel and won't be
> for some time.
>
> I've contacted one of the i2c subsystem maintainers, Jean Delvare, but
> unfortunately he doesn't seem to care about this problem and his
> advice in dealing with it is to "Just get these drivers merged in the
> kernel. Ah ah ah!"...
>
> Clearly the more sane and reasonable solution is to not cripple the
> menu options in the first place, especially when it creates no benefit
> and only serves to limit/restrict the users ability to select what he
> needs. I'm asking that the patch be reverted and anyone in agreement
> to please voice their opinion here in public.
>
> Best regards,
> -Derek
--
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