linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] omap changes for v2.6.39 merge window

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 1 Apr 2011 02:42:52 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	David Brown <davidb@...eaurora.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] omap changes for v2.6.39 merge window

On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 12:56:33AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> [110330 15:22]:
> > > On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Tony Lindgren wrote:

> > > > One thing that will help here and distribute the load is to move
> > > > more things under drivers/ as then we have more maintainers looking
> > > > at the code.

> > > Guess what's that going to solve? Nothing, nada.

> > > Really, you move the problem to people who are not prepared to deal
> > > with the wave either. So what's the gain?

> > I guess my point is that with creating more common frameworks people
> > will be using common code. Some examples that come to mind are clock
> > framework, gpiolib, dma engine, runtime PM and so on.

> For all that to happen you need a really experienced team with a
> strong team lead to fight that through and go through the existing
> horror while dealing  with the incoming flood at the same time.

My experience is that it's not that bad doing this providing you can
convince people to actually show their code to the relevant subsystem
maintainers and they have time to look at the code.  The first step is
reasonably tractable since it's a fairly basic level of review and as a
subsystem maintainer you're well enough motivated to at least ensure
that people aren't breaking the abstractions enough to cause problems
for anyone but the people directly working with the drivers.
--
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/