linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] omap changes for v2.6.39 merge window

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:	Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:45:26 -0700
From:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	David Brown <davidb@...eaurora.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] omap changes for v2.6.39 merge window

* Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> [110330 15:22]:
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> 
> > * Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> [110330 14:07]:
> > > 
> > > So one person will be not enough, that needs to be a whole team of
> > > experienced people in the very near future to deal with the massive
> > > tsunami of crap which is targeted at mainline. If we fail to set that
> > > up, then we run into a very ugly maintainability issue in no time.
> > 
> > One thing that will help here and distribute the load is to move
> > more things under drivers/ as then we have more maintainers looking
> > at the code.
> 
> Guess what's that going to solve? Nothing, nada.
> 
> Really, you move the problem to people who are not prepared to deal
> with the wave either. So what's the gain?

I guess my point is that with creating more common frameworks people
will be using common code. Some examples that come to mind are clock
framework, gpiolib, dma engine, runtime PM and so on.

Then even arch specific driver code becomes generic and separated
from the arch specific code. And then the driver subsystem maintainer
can review it easier.

Regards,

Tony
--
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/