From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "John W. Linville" Subject: Re: linux-next: wireless tree build failure Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 09:06:12 -0400 Message-ID: <20090422130612.GB3288@tuxdriver.com> References: <20090422115738.524272c8.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <1240390746.17388.64.camel@johannes.local> <20090422230333.e1f7d3db.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from charlotte.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.58]:47998 "EHLO smtp.tuxdriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752985AbZDVNPz (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Apr 2009 09:15:55 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090422230333.e1f7d3db.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Johannes Berg , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Matthew Garrett , Len Brown On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 11:03:33PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Johannes, > > On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 10:59:06 +0200 Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > Fun. Another rfkill problem. It'll get worse -- I have a complete rfkill > > rewrite in the pipeline. For this part it's easy, just remove > > user_claim_unsupported use from the driver. > > > > Any suggestions on how to handle the other merge problems? > > Well, the best way (and I know this is simplistic and maybe difficult) is > to introduce the new rewrite alongside the old code and then slowly move > the clients of the API over. Maybe we should put user_claim_unsupported back into struct rfkill (and deprecate it) for now? John -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.