linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] Clocklib: generic clocks framework

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:	Fri, 25 Apr 2008 21:20:10 +0100
From:	Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:	Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>, Dmitry <dbaryshkov@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	Haavard Skinnemoen <haavard.skinnemoen@...el.com>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
	pHilipp Zabel <philipp.zabel@...il.com>, tony@...mide.com,
	David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>, hiroshi.DOYU@...ia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Clocklib: generic clocks framework

On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 12:39:42PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> WTF? There are currently around 10 copies of clock code in the tree,
> every one slightly different. If this can help us get rid of all that
> crap, that's a GOOD THING, normative or not.

At the expense of people going off and inventing their own APIs because
they find that the "normatived" clock API doesn't do what they need to?

That's what will happen if you try to force a framework on folk which
they don't agree with.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:
--
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/