On 07/02/2013 02:16 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 08:02:00AM +0200, Mike Looijmans wrote:
On 07/02/2013 03:28 AM, Joel Fernandes wrote:
Sweet! Any particular reason why it wasn't merged in vs the existing ping-pong code?
I've posted questions and other stuff concerning the McASP/OMAP1, but there was very little interest, so I supposed the chipset was on its way out and there wasn't any point in maintaining it.
Did you CC the relevant maintainers and other people working on the code? You've not done so on this thread... if you only post to the list it's very likely that people won't see what you've sent.
I'm relatively new to Linux kernel programming. The key problem for me was - and still is - that there is so overwhelmingly much information available, that it's virtually impossible to find out things that would be obvious for long-time developers, like finding out who the maintainer for a piece of code is. I still don't know that, by the way. How do I find the "CC" list that I'm supposed to send bugs/suggestions/patches to for a given piece of code?
I guess that a document on kernel-driver-development-for-people-who-used-to-work-with-a-centrally-organized-OS-and-used-to-get-all-their-answers-from-them would help, but then again finding that particular document - or realizing that it even exists (it doesn't, does it?) - would be the next problem.
It's quite easy to find out how one goes about writing a driver, but the process surrounding it - such as finding whether such a driver already exists, where to go for technical advice and where to post the git patch for inclusion in mainline is something that no one seems to want to dwell on.
Sorry if I'm ranting here. Maybe in time I'll learn to behave...
Mike