linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 0/4] mfd: reorganize Intel drivers

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1421770556.31903.98.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date:	Tue, 20 Jan 2015 18:15:56 +0200
From:	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/4] mfd: reorganize Intel drivers

On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 15:46 +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jan 2015, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 13:48 +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > On Thu, 11 Dec 2014, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > 
> > > > This patchset creates a new folder under drivers/mfd and moves there Intel
> > > > related drivers.
> > > > 
> > > > There is no functional change. The names of the kernel configuration variables
> > > > are kept the same.
> > > 
> > > Can you explain to me why you think the Intel drivers need their own
> > > sub-directory please?
> > 
> > For me it seems logical. We have many drivers related to Intel specific
> > SoCs (in comparison the other mfd drivers that usually named in
> > according to some standard chip codename) and they meanwhile have long
> > awkward prefixes. Moreover they could share common dependencies like
> > X86.
> 
> I'm not comfortable with it and am yet to see the need.  What I would
> suggest is to prefix 'intel-' or similar to the related files.  From
> there we can see how overbearing the files are becoming and make a
> decision based on that.
> 
> If there are too many Intel related files, my first question(s) will
> be a) why are there so many files b) are so many files required and c)
> should they really live in MFD.
> 
> But as yet, this patch-set is the only indication that something needs
> to be done at all.
> 

Agreed. We will continue to use prefixes (intel_ for *.c, *.h files, and
module names, and intel- for resulting *.ko files) and simultaneously
think how we can arrange the files better.

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
Intel Finland Oy

--
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/