netdev - Re: [PATCH] stmicro: rename it to dwc to improve future development

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 17 Jan 2017 10:16:45 +0000
From:   Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>
CC:     <peppe.cavallaro@...com>, <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] stmicro: rename it to dwc to improve future development

Hello,

Às 6:58 PM de 1/16/2017, David Miller escreveu:
> From: Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>
> Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 13:26:31 +0000
> 
>> The goal of this patch is to create an oficial Designware Ethernet place
>> to deploy new drivers based on this family of IPs. stmmac was left
>> untouched since it is a designware based driver. New ethernet designware
>> IP based drivers should be placed in this place, improving code organization
>> and it becomes clear to the kernel user the purpose and scope of each driver.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Joao Pinto <jpinto@...opsys.com>
> 
> Sorry, I am not applying this.
> 
> This would mean that every single -stable backport of a fix to this
> driver would require fixing up the directory and/or file name of every
> single change without any exception.
> 
> This is an unreasonable burdon to put upon me, and every single person
> who has to backport bug fixes into older releases of the kernel.
> 
> Please stop submitting this rename change.  It is fine to leave the
> driver with the stmmac name, and there is zero user benefit to the
> rename and only negatives for people who have to work on backports.
> 
> I saw no agreement reached between yourself and anyone who voiced
> opposition to this driver rename.  Therefore it was entirely
> inappropriate for you to resubmit this change again.

Just submited an alternative to the initial rename patch with 0 impact to
STMicroelectronics, so I tried to find a better solution.

I respect your decision.

A new Designware Ethernet IP title driver is being developed at this moment.
Could you please suggest a suitable place to put it, in order to avoid problems
when we reach the upstream phase?

Thanks.

> 
> I heard very clearly your argument that you would help with the problem
> with the backports, but that is a completely empty gesture.  Here's why.
> 
> You cannot help with the problem, nor can any other developer working
> on this driver.  People all over the world are going to want to
> backport this patch or that, and I myself work in my own little
> routine and can't depend on having to have a back and forth with you
> over and over again for every single fix to this driver I decide is
> reasonable for a -stable backport.
>