linux-kernel - Re: [PULL REQUEST] i2c for 4.13

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, 13 Jul 2017 09:56:10 +0200
From:   Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PULL REQUEST] i2c for 4.13

Hello,

On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:16:32AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de> wrote:
> >  drivers/i2c/i2c-core-acpi.c                        |  665 ++++++++
> >  drivers/i2c/{i2c-core.c => i2c-core-base.c}        | 1684 +-------------------
> >  drivers/i2c/i2c-core-of.c                          |  276 ++++
> >  drivers/i2c/i2c-core-slave.c                       |  115 ++
> >  drivers/i2c/i2c-core-smbus.c                       |  594 +++++++
> >  drivers/i2c/i2c-core.h                             |   24 +
> >  drivers/i2c/i2c-stub.c                             |   14 +-
> 
> Side note on this.. (and doesn't affect the pull - I pulled it and
> it's going through my test build right now).
> 
> Please don't do the silly "start every filename with the same prefix".
> It annoys people (ie me) that use tab-completion, and it just looks
> stupid.
> 
> And this core re-org does it twice over - first with "i2c-" and then
> with "core-".
> 
> Of *course* it's "i2c-something.c" - it's in the i2c directory. So
> that part is entirely pointless.
> 
> And the "core-something.c" part seems to be entirely to keep the files
> together - but if the issue really is "sort files together", then
> that's why we have subdirectories.
> 
> So I personally tend to much prefer
> 
>    drivers/i2c/core/acpi.c
>    drivers/i2c/core/base.c
>    drivers/i2c/core/of.c
>    drivers/i2c/core/slave.c
>    drivers/i2c/core/smbus.c
>    drivers/i2c/core/core.h
> 
> as the model. Then things *really* sort together, auto-complete works
> better, and tools like "git diff --dirstat" etc that group changes by
> directories also automatically just do the right thing.
> 
> And notice how the filenames are smaller and prettier too? It's just a
> win/win situation.
> 
> But I'm not going to enforce my style guide on you, since I very
> seldom actually end up touching those files. If this was some area
> where I often actually ended up looking at things, I'd almost require
> a sane directory structure, though.
> 
> Because "name things with the same prefix" is not a sane directory structure.

Another reason I remember for the prefix thing is that this way the
kernel modules are not named of.ko, core.ko and base.ko. (But this can
be fixed in the Makefile of course with some more prose.)

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |