linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] msm: add single-wire serial bus interface (SSBI) driver

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]

Message-ID: <8ya8vx7jvqh.fsf@huya.qualcomm.com>
Date:	Tue, 22 Feb 2011 19:05:58 -0800
From:	David Brown <davidb@...eaurora.org>
To:	Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>
Cc:	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>, Dima Zavin <dima@...roid.com>,
	Bryan Huntsman <bryanh@...eaurora.org>,
	Kenneth Heitke <kheitke@...eaurora.org>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, tsoni@...eaurora.org,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	ARM PORT <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] msm: add single-wire serial bus interface (SSBI) driver

On Tue, Feb 22 2011, Nicolas Pitre wrote:

> And if someone else comes up with a SSBI interface, then it will be much 
> easier to notice the already existing driver if it is in the driver 
> directory rather than somewhere else in some unrelated (from that 
> person's pov) obscure directory.

Well, I'm fairly sure that nobody would be making an SSBI interface, but
point taken.

>> It seems kind of unusual to create an entirely new directory under
>> drivers to hold what will only ever be a single driver.
>
> Well, a couple examples exist already: drivers/dca, drivers/nfc, 
> drivers/sn, drivers/tc, drivers/vlynq, etc.  And if you expect to have 
> more oddball msm drivers then you can create a drivers/msm directory, 
> similar to the existing drivers/macintosh, drivers/parisc, drivers/s390, 
> drivers/sh, drivers/video/omap, drivers/video/omap2, etc.

drivers/msm seems like a reasonable place.  We already have other
drivers that are in appropriate places.

So what kinds of things constitute drivers versus arch-specific code?
Currently, iommu drivers seem to be sprinkled throughout arch.

We also have a shared-memory driver-type thing that is only used by
other drivers.  Does that make sense to be in drivers/msm?

Ken, do you mind moving this driver into 'drivers/msm' as the first one
there?

Thanks,
David

-- 
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
--
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/