On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 05:43 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 05:36:48PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 13:59 -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > > > /* The first entry is a placeholder for the insmod-specified
> > > > device */
> > > > - { USB_DEVICE(0x049F, 0x0003) },
> > >
> > > Is it obvious why this patch is correct? Especially given the
> > > comment just before the line you delete, and the code
> > >
> > > if (vendor) {
> > > ipaq_id_table[0].idVendor = vendor;
> > > ipaq_id_table[0].idProduct = product;
> > > }
> > >
> > > in ipaq_init()?
> >
> > My mistake, quick on the patching going through this dupe list.
> >
> > Might I add that this is terrible use of the device table, though.
> > Clutters userspace, and adds processing to module-init-tools programs.
>
> It's a hold-over from the times when we didn't have the sysfs "add a new
> id" interface for usb-serial drivers, which only recently was created.
>
> So we just have to live with it, and the infinitesimal speed hit it
> creates :)
Any objection to adding it to planned-for-removal and spitting out a
printk when someone uses the "feature"?
--
Ubuntu : http://www.ubuntu.com/
Linux1394: http://wiki.linux1394.org/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
