Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 25 Jul 2008 23:59:36 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | 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@gmail.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
| |