linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PATCH] char/misc patches for 3.10-rc1

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: <CA+55aFzLtBwsvVrnT2DrUOU+eYrQ5eiKeamRb4Y5+-TVgbuM5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 29 Apr 2013 12:15:17 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:	David Brown <davidb@...eaurora.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>
Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] char/misc patches for 3.10-rc1

On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> It's a "bus" type, that has individual drivers connecting to it.
>
> No it isn't, and no it doesn't.

Ok, searching more, I find this discussion on lkml:

Dima Zavin reasonably wrote

 "SSBI is a Qualcomm proprietary protocol that will only ever have one
ssbi "host" driver in it. The slave is always the PMIC .."

arguing that it should stay in arch/arm/mach-msm/ where it got
developed by the Android guys.

The "explanations" for why it should be in drivers/ is this mindless drivel:

On Tue, Feb 22 2011, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-02-22 at 12:47 -0800, Dima Zavin wrote:
>
>> What is the problem leaving it under arch/arm/mach-msm?
>
> Because it's a driver.

Seriously. That's the *ONLY* explanation given.

WTF? That's a singularly *bad* reason for moving things to "drivers".
If it's specific to some particular machine board, it should damn well
stay as specific as possible, instead of being moved to "drivers/"
"just because".

This seems to be nothing but a continuation of the same old ARM story:
people were embarrassed by the fact that ARM looked bad in the
diffstats, so they for many moons now have actively tried to spread
out the arm-specific manure in other places. Not because it makes
sense anywhere else, but because it makes ARM look less proprietary,
and less filled with ad-hoc hacks.

I object. If it's a single-platform driver, it shouldn't be in
"drivers". It should be under the one single platform that supports
it. Seriously.

Then, *if* it ever becomes anything more than that, go right ahead and
make it more generic. But don't move it to drivers "just because it's
a driver".

And you seem to have fallen for the lipstick-on-a-pig explanation,
hook line and sinker.

And I'm calling the ARM people out on this idiocy. Arnd and Nico -
stop encouraging this kind of crap. Move things to drivers only once
there is actual reason for it. If it's some proprierary single-SoC
thing, it can damn well stay away from other people. And it definitely
shouldn't mess up autocomplete in some core location.

                   Linus
--
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/