linux-kernel - Re: [RFQ] New driver architecture questions

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 14 May 2009 17:58:03 -0700
From:	adam radford <aradford@...il.com>
To:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Cc:	"Mukker, Atul" <Atul.Mukker@....com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Austria, Winston" <Winston.Austria@....com>,
	"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFQ] New driver architecture questions

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 9:16 PM, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> wrote:
> Taking drivers/net/e1000e as an
> example,
>
>        hw.h            hardware-specific defines, ~cross-OS
>        82571.c         code specific to 8257x chip family, ~cross-OS

82571.c contains Linux specific code such as:  including Linux
specific header files, calls to msleep().

>        ich8lan.c       code specific to ICH8+ chip family, ~cross-OS

ich8lan.c contains Linux specific code such as:  might_sleep(),
mutex_trylock(), mutex_unlock(), udelay(), msleep(), writel(), readl().

Perhaps this is a bad example?  It seems like the "common layer"
sections that are "cross-OS" shouldn't contain any Linux specific code at all.

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