linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCHv2 1/4] drivers/otp: add initial support for OTP memory

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 Mar 2011 23:01:56 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
Cc:	Jamie Iles <jamie@...ieiles.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	vapier@...too.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCHv2 1/4] drivers/otp: add initial support for OTP memory

On Friday 25 March 2011 22:12:46 Greg KH wrote:
> > Why is this a bus? You don't have any device matching code or similar,
> > and the devices typically are on an existing bus_type (e.g. platform_bus).
> > I think it would make more sense to do this as a class.
> 
> No, for new things, we want to use busses instead of classes please.
> Especially as this does create devices, which are best put on a bus
> somewhere.

I don't understand. Isn't that rather inconsistent?

I realize the same thing came up with the IIO subsystem, where I also
didn't understand it.

In my mental model of Linux drivers, a bus is something that physically
connects devices and the bus code matches devices with drivers, while a
class groups logical devices that get created by the driver itself.

	Arnd
--
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/