Andrea Arcangeli (email@example.com)
Sun, 27 Sep 1998 21:04:22 +0200 (CEST)
On Sun, 27 Sep 1998, Tim Waugh wrote:
>On Sun, 27 Sep 1998, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>> Ok, but do you agree to leave the warning there? Phil didn' t agreed but I
>> hope to have convinced it.
>I'd rather it wasn't there, to be honest. When I put it in, it was
>because I thought there was still code in parport to deal with lurkers in
>a special way. As it turns out that there isn't, and that the LURK flag
>does nothing at all, I'd be quite happy for that whole if() to come out.
Why should' t we warn pardevice developers that LURK does mean nothing?
Should I change it in: printk("this is a harmless message:
Note that parport internals changed ~one year ago and nobody in one year
has learn that LURK means nothing (they preferred to implement the null
preempt function instead). So I still think it' s needed (as KERN_DEBUG).
-- To unsubscribe, send mail to: firstname.lastname@example.org --
-- with the single word "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. --
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Wed 30 Dec 1998 - 10:18:25 EST