On Thu, 2005-05-19 at 11:48 -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 09:19:33 -0400 (EDT)
> > On Thu, 19 May 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > We should remove the feature. If there is demonstrated need for multiple
> > > instances then it should be done by more conventional means - syscall,
> > > allocation of a device major then use the minor as a selector or whatever.
> > I'd suggest removing the connector code completely.
> I totally agree, it's crap at the current time and the author doesn't
> fix the problems being shown in it, in fact he defends some of them
> even this one. It needs lots of work still.
There were no problems reported.
What I defend is ability to function correctly when some changes
may be introduced by providing some extensions that may be used.
Crash is better than data corruption -- Arthur Grabowski
Description: This is a digitally signed message part