Re: [PATCH] HP Mobile data protection system driver with interrupt handling

[Dmitry Torokhov]

On 11/7/06, Burman Yan <yan_952@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >From: "Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx>
> >To: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@xxxxxxxx>
> >CC: "Burman Yan" <yan_952@xxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Jean
> >Delvare" <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Subject: Re: [PATCH] HP Mobile data protection system driver with interrupt
> >handling
> >Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 17:18:53 -0500
> >
> >On 11/6/06, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>On Fri, 03 Nov 2006 18:33:31 +0200
> >>"Burman Yan" <yan_952@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > +
> >> > +static unsigned int mouse = 0;
> >>
> >>The `= 0' is unneeded.
> >>
> >> > +module_param(mouse, bool, S_IRUGO);
> >> > +MODULE_PARM_DESC(mouse, "Enable the input class device on module
> >>load");
> >
> >Does the parameter have to be called "mouse"? I'd rename it to "input"
> >and drop the work "class" from parameter description.
>
> Dropping the "class" seems logical, but calling the parameter input
> seems confusing to me - to a user that doesn't want to read too much
> manual/code and just wants to play around with the device (I do that
> sometimes)
> mouse sounds more reasonable to me.

Except that the device is more similar to a joystick than a mouse...

--
Dmitry
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/