From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751415AbXBNIsE (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2007 03:48:04 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751489AbXBNIsE (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2007 03:48:04 -0500 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.24]:47896 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751415AbXBNIsC (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2007 03:48:02 -0500 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 00:47:55 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: "Vitaly Wool" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] 8250: make probing for TXEN bug a config option Message-Id: <20070214004755.faa96e55.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20061226194317.3fd3ec14.vitalywool@gmail.com> <20070213224643.14d27cd3.akpm@linux-foundation.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.7 (GTK+ 2.8.17; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:37:52 +0300 "Vitaly Wool" wrote: > On 2/14/07, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > I think this should be a module option/boot parameter, not a config-time > > option. > > > > > Hmm, why? I can't think of a platform where one 8250-compatible UART is > problematic and another isn't :) > Is it not possible that the same kernel package can be installed on systems which do and don't need this feature? If so, we don't want to force the provider of that package to create two packages. That, plus the chances of the package creator actually knowing about this option aren't great. Generally, if it can be done at runtime it is better to do so, no?