| |||||||||||||
On multi-platform driversOn multi-platform driversPosted Sep 12, 2011 20:28 UTC (Mon) by kleptog (subscriber, #1183)In reply to: On multi-platform drivers by utoddl Parent article: On multi-platform drivers
I agree there's a lot of noise going around. The phrase "architectural alignment" seems to have been interpreted to mean the worst possible things, but the driver was being proposed for merging to mainline so evidently people thought it would be acceptable code-wise. I certainly haven't seen anyone post a single line of code showing anything the kernel devs won't stand for.
(Log in to post comments)
On multi-platform drivers Posted Sep 18, 2011 2:00 UTC (Sun) by kabloom (guest, #59417) [Link]
I haven't looked at any of the code, and I understand people's concern about what might happen in future refactorings of the kernel wireless system, but the kernel's code review process is pretty demanding in terms of how much work (and modification) a module developer has to do to conform to the kernel's way of doing things before they get accepted into the mainline.
If Broadcom has managed to satisfy the kernel developers' demands for conformance, and they still feel that there's sufficient architectural alignment between the Linux driver and their other drivers, then Broadcom's definition of "sufficient architectural alignment" is probably loose enough that they'll be able to maintain sufficient architectural alignment in the face of future kernel development work.
|
|||||||||||||