Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...>, Kok, Auke <auke-jan.h.kok@...>, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@...>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...>, NetDev <netdev@...>, e1000-list <e1000-devel@...>, linux-pci maillist <linux-pci@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, David S. Miller <davem@...>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...>, Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...>, Ronciak, John <john.ronciak@...>, Allan, Bruce W <bruce.w.allan@...>, Greg KH <greg@...>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...>, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...>
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 09:40:23AM -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
The difference is that :
1) either could be used for a long time
2) the old worked so bad that the word has spread among people in forums
to try the new driver instead.
I think that splitting drivers should be something accepted in the kernel's
lifetime, but users must not be left confused. It's clearly easier to insert
ourselves in their common process to wave hands indicating that their setup
will soon not work anymore (eg: by having e1000 indicate what driver must be
loaded for unsupported devices).
Willy
--
