linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] spi: reorganize drivers

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:	Mon, 6 Jun 2011 14:16:36 +0200
From:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>,
	"Ben Dooks (embedded platforms)" <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
	linux-pcmcia@...ts.infradead.org,
	Matt Porter <mporter@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Alexandre Bounine <alexandre.bounine@....com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Michael Buesch <mb@...sch.de>,
	"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Florian Fainelli <florian@...nwrt.org>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	spi-devel-general@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: reorganize drivers

On Mon, 6 Jun 2011 13:21:07 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday 06 June 2011, James Bottomley wrote:
> > I'd say it only makes sense if we do it for all busses ... so USB and
> > PCI would have to move too.  Logically, the bus code should move and we
> > should be left with the drivers in both of those directories.  I'd also
> > say that we don't have to deepen the tree: /bus would be fine.  That
> > way, /drivers/<bus> would be only for <bus> specific drivers, with non
> > bus specific drivers we just group them by function as now.
> 
> A top-level /bus would work for me, and I guess would also address Russell's
> concern. Regarding bus-specific drivers, we're gradually moving those out
> of the bus specific directories anyway, basically the only bus directory
> that really has device driver in it is USB at this point. It makes some
> sense to have a bus-specific low-level user space interface driver like
> sg or uio in the bus directory, but everything else should really belong
> into some other subsystem.

Err, what about I2C and SPI? Aren't drivers/i2c/busses and drivers/spi
full of "device drivers"? Or are these what you call "bus-specific
drivers"? Maybe we need to define all the terms before the discussion
continues further.

> (...)
> This is about to get worse as we introduce new subsystems (e.g. iommu,
> irq, clocksource, eeprom, nvram, ...) into which we are moving
> code from arch/arm, drivers/char and drivers/misc. Having buses and
> drivers in a separate hierarchy would make the drivers directory and
> the respective menuconfig list more clearly structured IMHO.

This gets interesting. Would you suggest for example that i2c-core.c
goes to bus/i2c, and drivers/i2c/busses becomes drivers/i2c? And that
CONFIG_I2C is somewhere in menuconfig, and the hardware driver
selection for drivers/i2c is in a totally different place?

While I am surprised, I am not necessarily objecting. But it seems that
you should better define what your actual plan is, before asking us if
we agree with it.

-- 
Jean Delvare
--
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/