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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 05:54:56 +0100 (BST) From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org> To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> cc: paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/15] dec netdev: relocate DIGITAL based drivers to legacy On Thu, 28 Oct 2010, David Miller wrote: > > NAK for the TURBOchannel bits (defxx.[ch] and declance.c) unless you give > > a plausible justification. You won't get these drivers offered unless you > > have the bus in your system anyway, and if you do than you don't want to > > have them hidden somewhere in the corner. If you see anything wrong with > > these drivers, then please do let me know. > > > > Also defxx.c is PCI too (apart from being EISA and TC). > > PCI things can be legacy too. > > This is not about a specific bus technology, it's simply for > "really old stuff" so we can declutter the top-level of drivers/net Hmm, what's the difference between placing these drivers here or there and what's so particular about them that they cause clutter? I mean a mere high number of items does not cause a mess by itself -- the lack of order might. Also -- if this change goes ahead -- when I add new TURBOchannel drivers, should they go straight to legacy/? It sounds odd to me to have a thing obsolete straight from the beginning. Maciej -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists