Re: disabling CONFIG_LED_CLASS (SND_HDA_CODEC_REALTEK)

From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
To: Udo van den Heuvel <udovdh@xs4all.nl>
Cc: moderated for non-subscribers <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>,
	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Dan Murphy <dmurphy@ti.com>,
	linux-leds@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: disabling CONFIG_LED_CLASS (SND_HDA_CODEC_REALTEK)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 10:37:58 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201014083758.GB31728@amd> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9cf705b9-1fca-2445-43de-916b13b9103f@xs4all.nl>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1191 bytes --]

On Wed 2020-10-14 10:34:21, Udo van den Heuvel wrote:
> On 14-10-2020 10:27, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >> One should have thought about stuff beforehand.
> > 
> > We did. And decided this is best solution.
> 
> Then the thought process went awry.
> 
> >> The non-selectability is not my fault.
> > 
> > It also does not affect you in any way.
> 
> It does.
> /boot fills up even sooner thanks to this unused code.
> Compiles last longer because of this unused code.

Have you measured how much slower and how much bigger it is? Do you
understand that you propose to make source code bigger and slower to
compile for everyone else?

You are filling my inbox.

> > Feel free to go to the mic LED discussion to see why we did it like
> > this. Then you can come up with better solution for problem at hand.
> 
> I did not think of forcing code onto somebody. Someone else did.
> This is effectively the effect of the LEDs thing.

Without understanding what was decided and why, this discussion is not
useful.

									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]