[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A799436.9020409@suse.de>
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2009 23:16:22 +0900
From: Tejun Heo <teheo@...e.de>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
Colin Guthrie <cguthrie@...driva.org>,
Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sound: make OSS device number claiming optional
Hello,
Alan Cox wrote:
>> If we're gonna do that, we might as well just rip off the pointless
>> 'claim everything so we can use our own module alises' code from
>> sound_core.c and be done with it. That really is the only problem.
>
> The interface expected is the sound_register_* interface and the sharing
> is likewise expected so you could for example mix OSS. CUSE and ALSA oss
> emulation drivers on the same system at the same time.
If OSS behaves like a good chrdev and claims what it can really do,
all that can be done so much easier at the chrdev level.
> Rewriting sound_register* in terms of minor number allocations using the
> fact modern kernels have better allocators for devices would also be
> preferable to the weird module hacks initially proposed. I guess a
> starting point would be to tweak soundcore to generate both message sets
> itself for a year and then pull the old stuff out.
I don't disagree with you in that the above would be the perfect
technical solution but I just don't think the balance sheet is right.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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