[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150319170339.GP25365@htj.duckdns.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 13:03:39 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Doug Thompson <dougthompson@...ssion.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@....samsung.com>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] EDAC: amd64_edac: decide if driver can load
successfully early.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 05:56:20PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> I don't see anything wrong with that and I don't see how that would
> repeat any iteration...
Just don't do it. It makes the driver behave differently from others
for no good reason. Driver being loaded or not doesn't indicate
anything anymore other than the code is loaded and you're adding
complexity to just make it more confusing and you don't have good
enough technical reasons to justify the deviation. What are you even
fighting for?
--
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