| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:28:46 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@....ac.uk> To: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de> CC: Bill Gatliff <bgat@...lgatliff.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Generic PWM Device API On 02/28/11 10:31, Sascha Hauer wrote: > On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 09:38:38PM -0600, Bill Gatliff wrote: >> Andrew, Linus: >> >> >> The git repository described in the following pull request implements >> a generic PWM device driver API. This API is intended to eventually >> supercede the existing PWM device drivers, but during a migration >> period will coexist peacefully with them. > > Sorry for the late answer, but it took some time to read the patches > again. > > Is it a good idea to have to APIs for the same thing in the kernel? > The old API has users whereas the new API has none. How can we migrate > from one API to the other when for example the backlight pwm driver > depends on the old API, SoC level drivers implement the old API, but > the atmel pwm driver is only available for the new API? > See the info in Bill's previous postings. He has other drivers queued up but wants to break up the review burden by merging this core stuff first... -- 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