netdev - Re: [RFC 26/72] arm: Move the ARM/ACORN 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:	Sat, 25 Jun 2011 20:22:05 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com
Cc:	"Russell King - ARM Linux" <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Sriram <srk@...com>, Vinay Hegde <vinay.hegde@...com>,
	Cyril Chemparathy <cyril@...com>,
	Wan ZongShun <mcuos.com@...il.com>,
	Lennert Buytenhek <kernel@...tstofly.org>,
	Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>,
	Anant Gole <anantgole@...com>,
	Chaithrika U S <chaithrika@...com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 26/72] arm: Move the ARM/ACORN drivers

On Saturday 25 June 2011, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
>   On Sat, 2011-06-25 at 09:59 -0700, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > More interestingly, if you have one of the 8390 clones, which
> > directory
> > > do you look in?  And shouldn't etherh.c live along side 8390's files
> > > as etherh is 8390-derived?
> > 
> > Jeff created a drivers/net/ethernet/8390/ directory for all of those,
> > which sounds sensible to me, but apparently he missed some of the
> > nonobvious ones. 
> 
> I was trying to keep the drivers that use the 8390 common files grouped
> together.
> 
> I know that there are other instances like this (for instance drivers
> derived from the lance.c driver) yet these derived drivers do not use
> the common files that other lance drivers use.  Because they are
> derived, yet do not use the common code, should they still be grouped
> together?  Just a question, I am fine with the idea.

Generally, I'd say yes, but it's not a strong preference.

In other subsystems, we group similar stuff together like that as well,
as a reminder that it should better use the common infrastructure, so
that someone copying the odd implementation has a better chance of
noticing the mistake early.

	Arnd
--
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