linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] misc: (at24) move header to linux/platform

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: <1414767040.1054326.1380226152008.JavaMail.root@mail>
Date:	Thu, 26 Sep 2013 16:09:12 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
To:	Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Cc:	linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...oirfairelinux.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] misc: (at24) move header to linux/platform_data/

Hi Wolfram,

> Wolfram wrote:
> 
> > > IMHO it makes sense. Why wouldn't we want all platform_data in
> > > include/linux/platform_data/?
> > 
> > For the same reason we don't want all driver source files in one
> > directory? It's a mess.
> 
> Well, that's different. Not all drivers expose platform data, but
> many subsystems have drivers with platform data. A common include
> directory for the *_platform_data structure definitions makes sense.

Also IMO having such header file in include/linux/i2c/ for a driver
declared in drivers/misc/eeprom/ is not very consistent.
So this is the purpose of this include directory. What do you think?

Best,
Vivien
--
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/